The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

Expenses for appeal shall be borne by the plaintiff.

Purport of claim and appeal

judgment of the first instance.

As to the Plaintiff’s lawsuit of this case seeking the cancellation of the registration by asserting that the registration of ownership transfer in the name of the Defendant, which was completed with respect to the instant real estate, constitutes the registration of invalidity of cause, the Defendant asserts that the instant lawsuit is unlawful as it is not specified

In order to cancel the registration of the previous part of land which has ceased to exist due to the annexation of land, the previous part of the land after annexation shall be specified and ordered to cancel the registration of the said part. On the other hand, in order to register one parcel of land by dividing it into two or more parcels of land after annexation, the cadastral surveying shall be conducted by the competent authority in the cadastral record first, and accordingly, the registration shall be made only when the parcel number, land category, boundary, or coordinates and area are determined and the registration is made in the cadastral record. Therefore, if it is impossible for the competent authority to implement this procedure due to the list attached to the judgment, as a list attached to the judgment, if it is impossible to distinguish each parcel of land by the former parcel number, the former parcel number shall not be indicated and registered unless there is a confirmation procedure, such as the parcel number and cadastral record,

(1) The registration of the transfer of ownership in the name of the defendant with respect to the real estate of this case was completed on the ground of a consultation on the acquisition of the real estate of this case (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 79Da1857, Oct. 27, 1980; Supreme Court Decision 97Da2993, Jun. 24, 1997; Supreme Court Decision 2009Da42017, Sept. 10, 2009). The facts that the registration of the transfer of ownership in this case was completed on March 16, 201 are either a dispute between the parties or acknowledged by the statement of evidence No. 1. B. The plaintiff sought registration of the transfer of ownership in the name of the defendant with respect to the real estate of this case by specifying the requested object only with the lot number prior to the merger.