Where it is deemed that any objection cannot be raised against a decision or disposition made or taken by a registration officer under Article 178 of the Registration of Real Estate Act.

When a registration officer has completed an active disposition in accordance with an application for registration, he/she shall not raise an objection unless it falls under Article 55 (1) and (2) of the Registration of Real Estate Act even if such disposition, etc. is unfair.

Article 178 of the Registration of Real Estate Act

The Order 71Ma105 dated March 24, 1971 dated January 26, 1971

Re-appellant

Seoul Civil History District Court Decision 72Ra450 delivered on March 8, 1973

The reappeal is dismissed.

According to Article 178 of the Registration of Real Estate Act, where an objection can be made by the registration officer, it may be made in principle when the registration officer has made a passive decision or disposition, such as rejection of inspection, but where the registration officer has completed active disposition in accordance with the registration application, even if such disposition, etc. is not unfair, it shall not be an objection unless it falls under Article 55 subparag. 1 and 2 of the Registration of Real Estate Act (see, e.g., Supreme Court Order 71Ma105, Mar. 24, 1971; Supreme Court Order 70Ma812, Jan. 26, 1971).

The registration as a problem in this case is about the application for cancellation registration under Article 82519 through 82525 of the Seoul Civil Court, Youngpo District Court, Youngpool registry office, 1971 on November 2, 1971, and the re-appellant asserts that the non-party entitled to registration is an unentitled person under the Registration Act, and each application for registration is not consistent with the registry, and the matters mentioned in the application are not consistent with the document proving the cause of registration. Despite the fact that the registration officer must dismiss the application under Article 55, 6 and 7 of the Registration of Real Estate Act, the registration officer's objection is made pursuant to Article 178 of the same Act because it is an unfair disposition to complete the registration after accepting it and entering it in the registry. However, it does not fall under Article 55, 6 and 7 of the same Act as the re-appellant's assertion is obvious, and it does not fall under Article 55, Article 1 and 2 of the same Act.

The Re-Appellant, unlike the view of Article 55 (1) and (2) of the Registration of Real Estate Act, has discussed that if the disposition or decision of the registry officer is unfair, it may raise an objection. However, there is no reason for the re-appellant to accept it.

Therefore, it is decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.

Justices Kim Young-chul (Presiding Justice)