Whether the public auction of this case is null and void

AA acquired the ownership of the real estate of this case under the National Tax Collection Act, and BB lost its ownership of the real estate of this case, so the public sale of this case, which was commenced on the basis of the registration in the name of BB around January 2003 thereafter, shall be null and void based on the registration in the name of BB

Article 77 of the National Tax Collection Act

2016 Ghana 109556 Registration for Cancellation of Ownership

】 】

Republic of Korea and three others

November 22, 2016

February 13, 2018

1. The plaintiff's claims against the defendants are all dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Cheong-gu Office

Defendant AA, BB, and CCC, with respect to each of the real estate listed in the separate sheet, performed the procedure for the cancellation registration of ownership transfer registration completed on September 26, 2006 by the ○○○○○ registry office, and completed the procedure for the cancellation registration of ownership transfer registration completed on September 26, 2006. Defendant Republic of Korea will implement the procedure for entrustment of ownership transfer registration due to public sale on January 24, 2003

1. Basic facts

A.DD completed the registration of ownership transfer on the instant real estate on February 6, 1995.

B. The ○○ Tax Office completed the attachment registration on October 23, 200 on the instant real estate on the grounds of the attachment on October 200, 200, and on the grounds of the attachment on June 18, 2001, "the June 21, 2001". The ○○ Tax Office, as DD failed to pay taxes, went through the public auction procedure on the instant real estate (hereinafter referred to as "the instant public auction") on January 27, 2003, determined the sale on January 30, 203 as the purchaser, the Plaintiff, the sales amount of KRW 1720,000,000,000,000 won on January 24, 2003, the Plaintiff paid each of the ○○ Tax Office’s KRW 200,000,000,000 on June 15, 203.

D. Meanwhile, EE paid the sale price on July 4, 2001 in the public sale procedure conducted at the request of the ○○ Tax Office with respect to the instant real estate. On June 21, 2006, EE completed the registration of transfer of shares due to the public sale on July 4, 2001 with respect to the instant real estate. Each of the above registrations of seizure was cancelled due to the public sale on July 4, 2001 on the same day.

E. On September 18, 2006, EE sold the instant real estate to Defendant AA, BB, and CCC. Accordingly, on September 26, 2006, EE completed the registration of ownership transfer in the future of Defendant AA, BB, and CCC with respect to the instant real estate.

F. The Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against EE to cancel the registration of transfer of ownership under this Court 2016 Single ○○○○○○, but was rendered a judgment against the Plaintiff on January 24, 2018.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence 1 to 5, Eul evidence 1

Each entry, including this, the purport of the whole pleading

2. The plaintiff's assertion

On February 3, 2003, the Plaintiff acquired the ownership of the instant real estate pursuant to Article 77(1) of the National Tax Collection Act by paying the purchase price in the instant public sale procedure. Accordingly, Defendant AA, BB, and CCC is not the owner of the instant real estate. Therefore, the ownership transfer registration of the instant real estate completed in their names should be cancelled, and the Defendant Republic of Korea is liable to the Plaintiff to implement the registration entrustment procedure with respect to the ownership transfer of the instant real estate due to the public sale on January 24, 2003.

3. Determination

A. Determination on Defendant Republic of Korea’s main defense

Defendant Republic of Korea asserts to the effect that it is unlawful for the Plaintiff to seek implementation of the above transfer of ownership registration procedure against Defendant Republic of Korea on the grounds that there is no legal interest in the lawsuit, since the Act provides a simple and special remedy procedure, not ordinary lawsuits.

On the other hand, Article 97 subparagraph 1 of the Registration of Real Estate Act provides that the registration of transfer of rights due to the disposition of public sale shall be entrusted to the registry office if the government office made the disposition of public sale. Thus, if the plaintiff applies for the entrustment of registration to the head of ○○ Tax Office, who is the owner of the land of this case, along with the relevant documents necessary for the procedures for the entrustment of registration, the ○○ Tax Office shall commission the competent registry office to complete the registration of transfer in the future of the plaintiff. However, as for the real estate of this case on July 4, 2001, the transfer of shares is completed in the EE market due to the public sale on the ground of the public sale on July 4, 2001 and the side of the Yan Tax Office cannot request the registration of transfer of ownership to the registry office in the future of the plaintiff. Accordingly, the lawsuit of this case cannot be seen as having any interest in the lawsuit of this case.

B. Determination on the cause of the claim

According to the above facts, it is reasonable to view that EE acquired the ownership of the instant real estate under the National Tax Collection Act by paying the sale price on July 4, 2001, and DD lost its ownership of the instant real estate. Nevertheless, the public sale of this case, which was commenced on the basis of registration in the name of DD around January 2003, is an invalidation procedure based on registration in the name of DD.

Therefore, the plaintiff's assertion that the plaintiff acquired ownership of the real estate of this case is not accepted.

4. Conclusion

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim against the defendants is dismissed in its entirety as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.