The judgment of the court below is reversed, and the case is remanded to the Gu Government District Court.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. Articles 35(1) and 60(1) of the Registration of Real Estate Act provide that when applying for registration, documents evidencing grounds for registration shall be submitted. When the registration management is completed, the registration number, the date of application number, the number of application number, the priority number and the purport of the registration system shall be stated in the document proving grounds for registration or a duplicate of application form, and when the registration management is completed, the registration number, the number of application number, the number of application number, the priority number and the purport of the registration system shall be returned to the person entitled to

Therefore, if it is recognized that the registration number, the order of registration, the registration system, etc. under the above provision is affixed to the sale certificate and the fact that the registration office is affixed, it shall not be deemed that the registration is completed and the registration office is returned to the person entitled to registration.

Therefore, it should be recognized that registration has been completed according to the registration number and priority number of the entry on the real estate stated in the document, unless there are special circumstances.

Article 356(1) of the Civil Procedure Act provides that a public official is deemed to have prepared in the course of performing his/her duties according to the method and purport of preparation of a document. However, in a case where there is a reflective proof that there are special circumstances, such as forgery or alteration, such presumption is broken out.

(See Supreme Court Decision 2003Da63166 Decided February 13, 2004, and Supreme Court Decision 2008Da40311 Decided November 13, 2008, etc.). A document consisting of private documents and official documents by adding a registration system to a sales certificate, etc. to a registration office’s entry may not be presumed or recognized as having been established as a part of the sales certificate itself, which is the part of the private document, on the ground that the establishment of the relevant official document is different from a document related to notarial acts.

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 88Meu5836, Sept. 12, 1989). 2. The reasoning of the lower judgment and the legitimate ground therefor.