As the registration of preservation of ownership in the name of the delinquent taxpayer is null and void, the defendant has a duty to express his/her consent in respect of the request for cancellation.

Since the original acquisitor of the instant building exists separately from the original acquisitor, the registration of ownership preservation of the Defendants constitutes invalidation of the cause. Accordingly, the registration of ownership preservation constitutes the establishment of a neighboring mortgage established on the basis thereof shall be cancelled, and the remaining Defendants are obliged to express their consent.

Article 401 of the Civil Act

2011 Gohap120533 Cancellation, etc. of registration of initial ownership

A construction

Loo 23

Eo, Goo, Goo, Goo, Goo, Goo, Goo, Goo, Goo, Goo, Kimo, Goo, Goo, and Non-Party and Non-Party

Park Jong-O(hereinafter referred to as the "Initial Site Owners") shall be the Seocho-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government o-O

On August 2002, as a right holder of the ownership transfer registration with respect to the oo site (hereinafter referred to as the "site in this case"), the ownership transfer registration is a right holder.

2. BBConstruction Co., Ltd (hereinafter referred to as "bB Construction") and the instant construction with their owner as the owner;

On the site, the construction of a oo apartment (hereinafter referred to as the "instant building") on the 7th floor above the ground;

On October 14, 2002, the Plaintiff entered into a contract with o0 million won and oo. 30, o. 9. As to the structural frame of the building construction of this case.

By the end of December 31, 2002, the construction period was set up and the subcontract was concluded. November 23, 2002

The new construction work was commenced.

(b) suspending construction works;

1) BConstruction had defaulted on March 19, 19, while the construction of the instant building was in progress.

C. Accordingly, from March 20, 200 to March 20, 200, the Plaintiff suspended construction with a retaining wall of the second floor and a large-scale assembly.

had been.

2) BConstruction on or around March 31, 2003, the land in this case from the owner of the above first site.

Nonparty A, Kimb, Leeb, Lee Bb, Jeongb, Kimb, Kime, Abbb, which has taken over the status of the owner, together with the division;

Iso, Kimd, Oda, and Defendant Mao, Shina, Kima, Leeo, Kimo, an independent party intervenor bb;

In respect of 18 persons who are holders of a right to ownership at the time of Parkbb, Jeongb, Lee bb,

Cancellation of the building construction contract, and o0,000 won for the construction cost for the completed portion

shall be settled, and any objection shall not be raised against the remaining construction and remaining construction works.

Done at the time of o.o. 4. 10 April 10, 200.

It is possible for owners to establish a new corporation to complete the project after changing the project.

The request was made to cooperate.

(c) the resumption and interruption of construction by cccc(hereinafter referred to as cc) by a corporation;

1) At the time of oo. 4. At the time of o.o. 4, the site owners shall, at the request of b construction, c.

c Around that time, the Plaintiff and the Plaintiff continued to undertake the construction of the instant building.

A subcontract which was previously entered into with BB Construction with respect to the structural construction of the building of this case

As in the amount of money, a subcontract was entered into with Hoo. From April 7, 2003, the Plaintiff entered into a subcontract with Hoo.

In other words, the aggregate construction of the instant building was carried out, and all of the aggregate construction and civil construction works around July 28, 2003 are completed.

The 80% of the roof construction work has also been completed.

2) C) The land price by December 20, 2004 to the owners of the site at the time of September 16, 2004

The cost of construction and construction shall be paid and the share of the land shall be purchased until the above date.

In the event that the above money is not paid, the construction work of the building of this case including the construction cost.

Any right shall be waived, and an objection shall be raised even if the construction has been carried out by the third party.

The letter of agreement (hereinafter referred to as "the letter of agreement in this case") was drawn up.

(d) the resumption of construction by CConstruction Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as “CConstruction”);

c If c fails to pay the money under the instant agreement, it is a right holder of land ownership.

18 The 18th c Construction on January 10, 2005 and the buildings of this case, with the exception of the c Construction and the structural construction

On January 2005, the contract was entered into with o0,000,000,000

From June 2007, the construction of the building of this case was carried out and completed the building of this case.

(e) Change of name;

On January 2005, the first land owner is the same as the change of the name of the owner of a building on or around January 2005.

Then 18 persons, the ownership of the site shares at the time of April 24, 2007, who were written and written comments.

From the initial site owners, the name of the owner of the building in this case was changed in the future.

(c)

(f) Registration of preservation of ownership:

1) On August 2005, the Plaintiff was not paid oowon for construction work from the owner of the building.

HO District Court 2005Kaoo by asserting that this is the right to be preserved and making it the right to be preserved as

On August 29, 2005, upon filing an application for provisional seizure of a building, the provisional seizure order was issued by the above court.

Accordingly, on August 30, 2005, in an unregistered state under Hoo-O on August 30, 2005

The first site station in which an application for a building permit was filed due to entrustment of a provisional seizure registration concerning the building.

Each of the registrations of ownership in this case was completed in the 1/12 equity shares in the future.

2) Following the completion of each of the above registration of preservation of ownership on the instant building: ① Defendant Leebb

o District Court 2005Kaoo's ruling on provisional seizure of real estate of 2005.12. 2005

21. The provisional attachment registration for the shares of the non-party Park Dongo-O for the shares of the non-party Parkb, and the non-party Aa savings bank

On July 20, 2010, pursuant to the order of provisional seizure against real estate of the Ho District Court 2010oo, the same court

The registration of provisional attachment against the shares of the defendant Leeo, Hoo, Newa, and Kimo under Hoo, and the third defendant Park Jong-a

o District Court Decision 2005Kaoo on January 11, 2006

Pursuant to No. 1947, each provisional attachment registration for the shares of the initial landowner, and No. 4 Nonparty Kimff ( September 2007)

27. The status of the provisional attachment authority jointly by Defendant Kima, Kimbb, Kim C, Kimdd, and Kime after death.

[Inheritance] On the basis of the ruling of provisional seizure against real estate of Ho District Court 2006Kaoooo, the same court

On March 24, 2006, the provisional attachment registration for the portion of defendant Jeongo, Kimo, Goo, and Goo with the receptiono on March 24, 2006, 5

Ano District Court 2006Kaooo For the same court in accordance with the ruling of provisional seizure against real estate

On April 3, 2006, the registration of provisional seizure for shares of the first site owner under Mooo, 6 The defendant's head

o Based on the order of provisional seizure against the real estate of Ho District Court 2006Kaoo, 2006.

5. The registration of provisional seizure of the shares of Defendant Hoo, Kimo, Goo, and Goo with the receptiono on 29.29. 7

The Republic of Korea shall have the same interest in the shares of the non-party under the Hooo on November 29, 2006, as

On February 8, 2010, the court acceptedoo on February 8, 2010, for the registration of seizure of the shares of defendant Kimo, 8 defendant Kimo

o District Court Decision 2007Kaoo on September 20, 2007

The provisional attachment registration for the shares of the non-party Park Dongo under the name of the non-party Parkb, and the non-party Lee Dong-a is in accordance with the defendant Shino.

On November 29, 2006, pursuant to the contract to establish a right to collateral security, the shares of Defendant Newo under the receiptoo under the same court

The registration of the establishment of a neighboring mortgage (hereinafter referred to as the "registration of the establishment of a neighboring mortgage of this case") was completed.

G. Progress of the litigation for cancellation of registration of ownership preservation of this case

1) Nonparty Kima, Kimb, an independent party intervenor who has taken over each ownership share in the instant land;

14 persons, such as Parko,Oo,o, etc., are 14 persons of Seoul Central District Court 2006 Looo

A lawsuit for cancellation of registration of ownership preservation was filed on the ground that the building was originally acquired, and

The building of this case on November 5, 2007 is an independent building socially accepted around July 28, 2003, and its shape and structure.

Since the 18-party who is the owner of the land at that time was awarded a winning judgment on the ground that the 18-party acquired the above building at the original time.

2) The plaintiff's independent party participation in the Seoul High Court 2008Oo, the appellate court of the above judgment

c) the preservation, etc. of ownership of the instant building on the ground that the instant building was originally acquired by c

During the period, the appeal filed a claim in subrogation of the cancellation of the shares of Nonparty Ga and Kima, and the appellate court on June 2009.

25.A request made by an independent party intervenor for the sole acquisition of the above building by C

The judgment (hereinafter referred to as the "final judgment of this case") was made on August 25, 201 by the Supreme Court.

Each final judgment was made.

(h) the status of the property in c;

1) The plaintiff from c on February 13, 2007 to o billion at par value for the construction cost of the building in this case from c on February 13, 2007

Receiving Promissory Notes dated February 13, 2007, dated April 30, 2008;

BB District Court 2010ooo in action seeking payment of the said Promissory Notes c

On June 2, 2011, the court rendered a favorable judgment, and on July 14, 2011, the judgment became final and conclusive.

2) c does not have any real estate owned as of the closing date of the present pleading, and insurance premium.

The ooo has been in arrears, and the obligation of the plaintiff has not been repaid.

Facts that there is no dispute, Gap 1-9 evidence, the purport of the whole pleading, and the purport of the whole pleading.

2. Determination as to the claims of the plaintiff and the independent party intervenor

A. The parties' assertion

1) The plaintiff's assertion

The original acquisitor of the building of this case shall have his own union as confirmed in the final judgment of this case.

The form and Gu of the building independent of social norms by constructing the building of this case with power and materials;

Since c is equipped with assistance, the plaintiff in subrogation of insolvent c.

Each registration of preservation of ownership shall be cancelled and the declaration of consent to interested parties shall be sought.

2) An independent party intervenor's assertion

The building of this case is newly constructed from the beginning to acquire ownership of the relevant part.

As such, 18 persons, who are land right holders, have originally acquired the relevant part of the building of this case.

c Since c renounced its rights under the instant agreement, the Plaintiff renounced its rights to the instant building.

such rights may not be asserted.

B. Determination

1) First, the time to view the instant building as an independent building under social norms is at any time.

For purposes of being called an independent building as a building; and

The main wall is exempted (see Supreme Court Decision 2000Da51872, Jan. 16, 2001).

Modern, as recognized above, the Plaintiff’s construction division on October 14, 2002 and c around April 2003, 2003

In succession, each of the structural construction works of the building of this case was subcontracted on July 28, 2003, and around July 28, 2003 and civil construction works.

In light of the fact that the roof construction is completed as a whole and completed 80%, the building of this case is around July 28, 2003.

It is judged that there was a form and structure that can be seen as an independent building under social norms.

2) Next, we examine who is the original acquisitor of the instant building.

A person who constructs a building at his/her own expense and effort shall, except in extenuating circumstances, grant the construction permit.

The ownership is originally acquired regardless of whether it has been registered in the name of another person, and on the other hand, causes the circumstances of the owner.

to the extent that the remaining construction has been completed after delivery of the building in which the construction was suspended;

w at the time of the suspension of the construction, the construction may be deemed to be an independent building under social norms.

the original owner shall acquire the ownership of the building in the original form and structure.

(See Supreme Court Decision 2005Da19415 Decided July 15, 2005, etc.)

Ownership of a newly constructed building is, in principle, a person who constructed in his own effort and materials;

Of course, a contractor's efforts and reconsiderations for a new building contract.

Even if the building is completed with the fee, the construction permit shall be granted in the name of the contractor and the contractor.

(h) the ownership of the completed building, such as the registration of ownership preservation, shall be vested in the contractor;

Where agreement is reached, the ownership of the building belongs to the contractor (Supreme Court).

November 25, 2005 (see Supreme Court Decision 2004Da36352 delivered on November 25, 2005).

Even if a new owner acquires or succeeds to the status of an old owner, he shall thereby acquire the original owner’s status.

No difference is made (see Supreme Court Decision 2005Da19415, Jul. 15, 2005).

In full view of the statements and the purport of the whole pleadings set forth in Gap 1 and 2, the first land owner shall:

Around September 2002, when entering into a contract for the new construction of the building of this case with BB Construction around September 2002

After completion of the completion inspection, the construction cost may be claimed, and the payment shall be made simultaneously with the delivery of the building.

(2) The construction of the building of this case, b and c succeeded in order to the construction of the building of this case

In addition, the majority right holders of the site of this case have agreed as above, and the share of the site of this case.

Persons directly purchased or pre-purchaseed, and they shall be between the Center Construction and the Corporation.

The fact that the sales contract was entered into for the purchase of specific parts of the water, b construction

Any person who has invested in the Fund shall acquire shares in the site of this case for the purpose of securing investment funds.

Recognition of the fact that the construction of the building in this case and the sales contract have been entered into for part of the building in this case

may be filed.

In light of the above facts, b construction, c, the contractor of the new building of this case

c Construction has completed the building of this case at its own effort and at its own expense.

(1) The payment of construction price shall be made from the right holders of the land in this case who have acquired a specific portion; and

It appears that the ownership of a specific part that was sold in the city was transferred to c, and c

As of July 28, 2003, the building of this case was independent of socially accepted ideas.

A building is considered to have been originally acquired on July 28, 2003 by c around July 2003.

Therefore, each registration of preservation of ownership in this case has been made for those who are not the original acquisitor.

shall be null and void.

3) An independent party intervenor becomes a co-owner of the instant building and completed the building.

Then, even if there is a right to acquire ownership in a specific part after the completion of the building.

When a building becomes a sectioned building with independence in structural and use, the Gu for the original acquisitor of the building

It is only possible to exercise the right to claim the transfer registration of ownership to a specific part of a divided building.

It cannot be viewed that the ownership of the specific part is acquired individually.

In addition, the agreement that CC waives its rights under the instant agreement on September 16, 2004

as long as c had already acquired the instant building on July 28, 2003, it was so long as c had already acquired it.

There is no change in the status of the original acquisitor (Supreme Court Decision 2005Da19415 Decided July 15, 2005)

§ 6).

4) Therefore, the Plaintiff, a creditor of the insolvent C, acquired the instant building at the time by C.

The plaintiff's assertion of subrogation is with merit, and independent party intervenors in this case.

An independent party intervenor's assertion based on the original acquisition of a building is groundless.

C. Sub-committee

c Since c had originally acquired the instant building, Defendant Leeo, Parko, Hoo, Goo, Goo, Goo, Goo, Goo;

The 1/12 shares of each of the registrations of initial ownership of the case in which Songo, Kimo,o, and Shino are null and void.

The registration procedure for cancellation is conducted, and the defendant Lee Aa performs the registration procedure for cancellation of the registration of the establishment of the neighboring mortgage of this case

The defendants, except the above defendants, do not comply with each of the above defendants of this case as stated in paragraph (3) of this case.

There is an obligation to express an intention of acceptance on the registration of cancellation of registration of preservation of ownership.

3. Conclusion

The plaintiff's claims against the defendants are accepted on the grounds of all the grounds, and the independent party intervenor's claims are accepted.

It is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.

May 29, 2013

June 13, 2013

1. The defendant Leeo, Hoo, Goo, Goo, Goo, Goo, Goo, Goo, Kimo, Goo, and Goo will implement the procedure for cancellation of registration of cancellation of 1/12 shares of each of the registration of the first /12 shares of each of the registration of the establishment of the establishment of the establishment of the establishment of the establishment of the establishment of the establishment of each of the real property completed by the defendant Goo on August 30, 2005 with respect to each of the real property listed in the separate sheet to the plaintiff.

3. The Plaintiff:

A. As to the cancellation registration of each 1/12 shares of Defendant Kimo, Tao, Tao, Tao, and Goo Savings Bank, among each registration of preservation of ownership completed on August 30, 2005 with the Ho District Court No. ooo on each of the real estate listed in the separate sheet, as to each registration of cancellation of each 1/12 shares of Defendant Kimo, Tao, Tao, Hoo, and Goo, Inc., as to each of the real estate listed in the separate sheet:

B. As to the cancellation registration of the 1/12 shares of the non-party Ga, among each registration of preservation of ownership completed by oo on August 30, 2005 with respect to each of the real property listed in the separate sheet, by the defendant Kimo and Leeb,

C. As to the registration of cancellation of shares 1/12 of Defendant Shino, among the registration of preservation of ownership completed on August 30, 2005 by the Seoul Central District Court on the real estate listed in paragraph 1 of the attached list, Defendant Parkbo on August 30, 205:

on August 30, 2005 with respect to each real property in paragraphs 2 to 18 of the Schedule

Of each registration of preservation of ownership completed with the receptionoo, defendant Leeo, Parko, Hoo, Goo, Goo, among the registrations of preservation of ownership,

1/12, each of the 1/12 of Hoo, Hoo, Hoo, Goo, Goo, Kimo and Non-Party Park Ga

For registration of cancellation of shares:

D. Defendant Ano with respect to each real property listed in paragraphs 1 through 5 of the attached list

Of each registration of preservation of ownership completed with Receivingoo on August 30, 2005 by the district court, defendant Leeo, Parko,

Shares 1/12 of each of 1/12 of Hoo, Goo, Goo, Goo, Kimo, Goo, Goo, Kimo and Non-Party Park Ba

For registration of cancellation:

E. The defendant Goo District Court about the real estate stated in paragraph 1 of the attached list

1/12 of Defendant Kimo among the registration of initial ownership completed on August 30, 2005 by the Receivingo on August 30, 2005

with respect to the registration of cancellation of section 1(1) to 11 of the Schedule,

(1) Each registration of ownership preservation completed on August 30, 2005 by the Seoul Central District Court of the Republic of Korea

For the registration of the cancellation of shares of Nonparty 1/12, the declaration of intention of each acceptance is made.

4. The independent party intervenor's claims against the plaintiff and the defendants are all dismissed.

5. The costs of litigation arising from the principal lawsuit shall be borne by the Defendants, and the costs of litigation arising from the intervention shall be an independent party.

The household shall be borne by the family members.

Cheong-gu Office

The same shall apply to the order.

1. Facts of recognition;

(a) Initial commencement of construction;