The defendant, who is the seizure authority, is a bona fide third person, and the plaintiff cannot oppose the defendant with the withdrawal of the sales contract.

As a seizure authority, the Defendant constitutes a third party under Article 108(2) of the Civil Act, which has a new legal interest based on the instant trade reservation, and thus, the Plaintiff cannot set up against the Defendant on the ground that the instant trade reservation was null and void.

Article 108(2) of the Civil Act

2012. Expression of intention to withdraw 2012.2

AAAA

Korea

June 11, 2013

June 25, 2013

1. The plaintiff's lawsuit shall be dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

On August 29, 2012, the defendant, as to the real estate listed in the attached list, expressed his/her intention of acceptance to the plaintiff by substituting the registration of the cancellation of the "right to claim transfer of ownership for provisional registration" which was completed on August 29, 2012 by the Dongdaemun District Court Gangseo-dong Branch of Seoul District Court.

1. Basic facts

A. BB Dong-dong Housing Reconstruction Project Association (hereinafter referred to as “BB association”) filed a lawsuit against the Plaintiff holding a building listed in the attached Table No. 1 (hereinafter referred to as “the building before new construction of this case”) in the project site in which the reconstruction project is being implemented, against the Plaintiff who owned the building listed in the attached Table No. 1 (hereinafter referred to as “the building before new construction of this case”) on May 10, 2007, Seoul Eastern District Court 2007dan26807, supra, seeking the implementation of the ownership transfer registration procedure based on trust.

B. On January 11, 2008, the Plaintiff entered into a sale reservation with respect to the instant newly constructed building at KRW 000 and KRW 0000 deposit money (hereinafter referred to as the “sale reservation”) with respect to the instant newly constructed building on February 11, 2008 between BB association No. 2, and the Seoul Dong District Court No. 2064 (hereinafter referred to as the “1 Provisional Registration”), respectively, on the ground of the sale reservation of the instant newly constructed building at KRW 200, the title transfer registration for the instant newly constructed building was received on February 11, 2008 by the Seoul East District Court No. 5064, the title transfer registration for the instant newly constructed building at KRW 100,000, and the title transfer registration for the instant new new building was received on April 14, 2011 by the Seoul District Court No. 2015.

2. The plaintiff's assertion

On August 29, 2012, the Plaintiff rescinded the agreement with Kim Yong-chul, and thus, the registration of No. 2 of the instant case shall be deleted, and the Defendant, a third party who has interest in the registration of No. 2 of the instant case, is obligated to express his/her intention to accept the registration of the cancellation of the registration of the attachment No. 2 of the instant case.

3. Determination

The plaintiff, ex officio, examined the legitimacy of the lawsuit of this case, and as seen earlier, asserted that the provisional registration of this case 2 should be cancelled since the contract of this case was cancelled.

"The plaintiff's declaration of consent to the registration of the second attachment" is sought for the cancellation of "the second attachment registration of this case". The second attachment registration of this case is to be cancelled ex officio when the second attachment registration of this case was made in addition to the second attachment registration of this case, and the plaintiff alleged that the second attachment registration of this case should be cancelled, and the second attachment registration of this case is to be done without the plaintiff's declaration of consent to the cancellation registration of the second attachment registration of this case, the second attachment registration of this case shall be deemed to be an unlawful lawsuit because there is no interest in the protection of rights." "The second attachment registration of this case" of this case is to be sought for the declaration of consent to the registration of the second attachment registration of this case 200. The plaintiff's second attachment registration of this case is to be cancelled by the second attachment registration of this case 100 and it constitutes a new attachment registration of this case 200, 300, 300, 300, 200, 30, 30, 2001.

4. Conclusion

Therefore, since the lawsuit of this case is unlawful, it is decided to dismiss it. It is so decided as per Disposition.