A guarantor under Article 49 of the Registration of Real Estate Act shall confirm and guarantee not only that the person who files an application for registration with the person responsible for registration is the true person, but also that the person responsible for registration and the person responsible for registration on the registry are the same person with due care as a good manager, and if there is any error in the guarantee due to a failure to perform the duty of care

The guarantor of this Article shall confirm and guarantee that the person applying for registration is the person responsible for registration, as well as the person responsible for registration and the person under a title on the registry as a good manager, and if there is any error in the guarantee due to a failure to perform his/her duty of care, he/she shall be liable.

Article 49 of the Registration of Real Estate Act, Article 750 of the Civil Act

Park Han-be

Defendant 1 and one other

Seoul High Court Decision 69Na56 delivered on August 6, 1969, Decision 69Na56 delivered on August 6, 1969

The original judgment shall be reversed, and

The case is remanded to the Gwangju High Court.

Judgment on the Plaintiff’s Grounds of Appeal

According to the reasoning of the judgment of the court below, since the court below found that the Defendants offered a guarantee under Article 49 of the Registration of Real Estate Act for the registration of the establishment of a collateral in the name of the plaintiff on January 25, 1964 with respect to the real estate owned by the non-party 1 (detailed number omitted) and the non-party 1, the owner of the above real estate, was not aware of the right of representation, and the non-party 2 was granted the right of representation from the non-party 1 to the non-party 3 for the purpose of executing the registration of the establishment of collateral security in the name of the plaintiff, the court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles as to the above registration of the non-party 3, which is a customary law clerk, and thus, the non-party 2 was not responsible for the registration of the non-party 1, the agent of the non-party 1 and the non-party 2, who is the real estate owner, should not be aware of the fact that the registration was destroyed by the non-party 2's fault.

Therefore, according to Article 406 of the Civil Procedure Act, the original judgment is reversed, and the case is remanded to the Gwangju High Court. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.

Supreme Court Judge Yang Byung-ho (Presiding Judge)