1. The part of the judgment of the court of first instance against the defendant shall be revoked.

2. The plaintiff's claim corresponding to the above revocation part.

Basic Facts

The court's explanation on this part is identical to the corresponding part of the judgment of the court of first instance, and thus cites this part in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

The Plaintiff’s registration of ownership transfer of this case’s assertion as to the cause of the claim is the invalidation of the cause, inasmuch as the ownership transfer registration of this case was made on the ground of completion of prescription, even though the Defendant or the Defendant did not possess the instant site

From December 16, 1979, the Plaintiff: (a) occupied the instant building and site by delivery; (b) on or around December 16, 1999, the prescriptive acquisition was completed for the instant site; and (c) around October 2017, the Plaintiff decided to independently own the right to the instant building and site through an agreement for the division of inherited property among F’s decedents; and (d) the Plaintiff succeeded to the claim for ownership transfer registration following the completion of the prescriptive acquisition for the instant site acquired by F.

Therefore, in order to preserve the right to claim ownership transfer registration of the instant building site, the Plaintiff sought cancellation of the ownership transfer registration of the instant building site against the Defendant in subrogation of the co-defendant C, the owner on the registry at the time of the completion of the acquisition by prescription.

In a case where the existence of a right or legal relation disputed in a related legal doctrine lawsuit has already been dealt with in a prior suit between the same parties, and a final judgment thereon has been rendered, the parties cannot make any assertion against it, and the court may not make any decision inconsistent with this, and the existence of a final judgment above shall not be determined by the court ex officio, even if there is no assertion by the parties concerned (see Supreme Court Decision 92Da3892, May 22, 1992). Meanwhile, even though the owner of real estate is in the position to file a claim for the registration of ownership transfer against the owner of real estate, a third party is the owner of real estate