Whether the registration of preservation of ownership of the property registered by the defendant constitutes invalidation

The registration of preservation of ownership cannot be deemed null and void as a matter of course solely on the ground that the defendant did not complete the additional registration of prohibited matters under the Housing Act at the time the registration of preservation of ownership was completed.

Article 24 of the National Tax Collection Act

Seoul Central District Court 2016Kahap510360 Registration of cancellation of ownership

○○ and 13 others

○○○○ Reconstruction Improvement Project Association and 17 others

2016.30

November 18, 2016

1. Of the instant lawsuit, the part of the Plaintiff’s claim for confirmation of ownership against the Plaintiff’s largest ○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○, Kim○○○○, and Kim○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○, among the instant lawsuits, and all of the claims for confirmation of ownership against each of the instant claims against the Plaintiff’s largest ○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○,

2. A. Each of the remaining claims against the Plaintiff ○○○○, Lee○○, and Lee○○○○○○○○, and ○○○○○○ Construction Co., Ltd., and each of the claims against Defendant Gab○○, Lee○○, the Republic of Korea, O○, Lee○, Lee○, Lee○, Lee○, Lee○, and Lee Dong-ri, Seoul, are dismissed.

B. Each of the remaining claims against the Defendant Il-il○○○○ Construction Project Association, ○○○ Construction Project Association, and ○○○ Construction Project Company, and all of the claims against Defendant Park○, Kim○, Kim○, Ma○○, Ma○○, Kim○, Ma○, the Republic of Korea, Lee○, ○○, ○○○, ○○, and ○○○○○○, and Seoul

C. Each of the remaining claims against the Plaintiff ○○○○○○○○○○ Construction Project Association, ○○○○○ Construction Project Company, and each of the claims against Defendant 2-○○○, Kim○○, Ma○○○, Ma○○○, Ma○○, the Republic of Korea, the Seoul Special Metropolitan City ○○○○○○, and Cheongan Construction Project Company are dismissed.

D. Each of the remaining claims against the Plaintiff ○○○○○○ Reconstruction Improvement Project Association, ○○○○○○ Construction Project Company, and Defendant 2-○○○○○○○○○○○○○○ Construction Project Company, and each of the claims against the Defendant 2-○○○, ○○○, the Republic of Korea, ○○○, ○○○, ○○○, and ○○○

E. Each of the remaining claims against the plaintiff Kim ○, Kim ○, Kim ○○, and Lee ○○○○○○○○, and ○○○ integrated construction corporation, and each of the claims against the defendant Lee Chang-sik, Ma○○, Lee ○○, Seoul, ○○○, ○○○○, and ○○ integrated construction corporation are dismissed.

F. The plaintiff Lee Il-○○○○○ Construction Project Association, and ○○ Comprehensive Construction Project Corporation of the plaintiff Lee Il-○○○

All of the remaining claims against Defendant Woo-won and the claims against Defendant Woo-gu Seoul Special Metropolitan City ○○○○○○ Office are dismissed.

G. Each of the remaining claims against the Defendant Il-○○○○○ Construction Project Association, ○○○ Construction Project Association, and ○○ Comprehensive Construction Project Company by the Plaintiff Kim○-○, and Defendant’s offense, windowgra, leap, ○○, ○○, and Seodae-gu

All claims against phrases are dismissed.

3. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiffs.

Cheong-gu Office

Attached 2 is as stated in the "statement of claim".

1. Basic facts

A. In order to remove the Jeju ○○○○○○○○ Construction Project Association (hereinafter referred to as the “Defendant Association”) in Seoul ○○○○○○○○○○○, 312-254, and 307-38 and to execute the reconstruction project (hereinafter referred to as the “instant reconstruction project”) on the ground, the association authorized on July 27, 200 in accordance with the former Housing Construction Promotion Act in order to execute the reconstruction project (hereinafter referred to as the “instant reconstruction project”) and to remove the Jeju ○○○○○○○○○○, Seoul ○○○○○○○, and 312-254, and 307-38, the part related to the instant case in its articles of association (hereinafter referred to as the “articles of association”) written by the time of the said establishment is as follows:

(1) A housing construction project operator under the Housing Construction Promotion Act shall invest in land owned by a member in kind and build incidental and welfare facilities, such as multi-family housing and commercial buildings. In such cases, a housing construction project operator under the Housing Construction Promotion Act shall be a joint owner.

(2) The association or implementer shall procure construction expenses, incidental expenses, etc. necessary for implementing the projects pursuant to a separate agreement.

(3) The method of selecting participating partners shall be resolved at a general meeting with the consent of at least 2/3 of the members after deliberation by the reconstruction promotion committee.

Article 8 (Qualification for Membership)

(1) A person qualified for membership shall be an apartment house (including a site attached thereto), river site, or house ownership registration within the project zone that the association implements, and the member shall be a person who consents to reconstruction.

Article 10 (Rights and Duties of Members)

(1) Members of a cooperative shall have the following rights and duties:

1. Right to request sale of buildings, etc. prescribed by a management and disposal plan;

5. Responsibility for the payment of dues and liquidation money;

6. Obligations to observe relevant Acts and subordinate statutes, regulations, rules, and resolutions of a general meeting;

Article 35 (Real Estate Trusts)

(1) In order to protect the rights of members and facilitate the promotion of a reconstruction project, real estate owned by members of an association within the premises for reconstruction may be registered as a trust.

(2) A cooperative shall exercise the property right entrusted to it in compliance with the purpose of a rebuilding project implementation, and when a reconstruction project is completed, it shall immediately cancel the trust and return the property right to the relevant

Article 36 (Application for Sale, etc.)

(1) Each cooperative shall notify each partner of the following matters within ten days from the date it obtains authorization for establishment:

1. An application form stating the period, place, method, criteria, reference matters, etc. for application for parcelling-out and an application form for parcelling-out;

2. Details of the covenant and business action plan of the authorized association;

(2) A cooperative member who intends to purchase housing, commercial buildings, or welfare facilities shall submit an application for parcelling-out accompanied by evidentiary documents, such as a certified copy of the register of land and buildings, within the period for application for parcelling-out determined and notified by the cooperative.

(3) An application for parcelling-out under paragraph (1) shall be submitted by registered mail to certify that the application has been sent within the period for application for parcelling-out by mail.

(4) Members who do not apply for the period of application for parcelling-out shall, in principle, liquidate cash: Provided, That this shall not apply to cases of applying for parcelling-out before the members' floor or unit drawing date.

(5) Members of multi-family housing shall be fairly conducted in the presence of police officers when drawing floors or units of housing, and the result of lottery shall be reported to the competent Gu office housing and the Korea Housing and Commercial Bank within seven days.

Article 37 (Standards for Management and Disposal Plans)

A management and disposal plan for property owned by members shall be formulated in accordance with the following standards:

1. In principle, apartment houses, etc. to be newly built on the basis of the area of the previous tenement house in which members have invested shall be sold, but multi-family housing shall be supplied to

2. The appraisal of the previous land and buildings shall be the amount obtained by taking an arithmetic mean of the appraised values of at least two certified appraisal institutions.

3. The standard amount appraised pursuant to the provisions of subparagraph 2 may be the land and buildings in the area where the existing apartment house and the existing detached house are jointly implemented; and

4. The area of multi-family housing, etc. to be sold in lots after the implementation of the project shall be based on the sale area, and the site shall be co-owned shares in proportion to the area and expenses of the apartment, etc. sold in lots;

5. In cases of an apartment house sold in lots by one member of the daily ○○○○ (16 households), an exclusive use area of the apartment house shall be determined by approximately 24.08 square meters.

C. The Defendant Cooperative reported the commencement of the reconstruction project of this case jointly with the first ○○ Construction Co., Ltd. on March 9, 2002. However, on October 30, 2002, the joint project undertakers were changed to Defendant ○○ Construction Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant ○○ Construction”) on March 15, 2005, again to Defendant ○○ Comprehensive Construction Co., Ltd. (Defendant ○○ Construction Co., Ltd. on May 3, 2007).

hereinafter referred to as "Defendant ○○ Construction" was changed respectively.

Article 3 (Status and Business Principles of Both Parties)

1. The defendant union and the defendant ○ integrated construction are joint project undertakers who have their responsibilities and obligations in accordance with the Housing Construction Promotion Act and the relevant laws and regulations, and shall execute the contract in good faith so that the project can be successfully completed.

2. In relation to this Agreement, the act of the Defendant Union representing the entire members and acting under this Agreement shall be deemed to constitute an overall authority and an obligation of the Union. At the same time, the members of the Defendant Union may not demand the Defendant ○○ Comprehensive Construction to exercise all rights, and may only be performed through the Defendant Union.

Article 4 (Method of Implementing Projects)

1. The Defendant Cooperative provides Defendant ○○ General Construction with the land owned by the members of the Defendant Cooperative and the Defendant Cooperative, ○○○○○-dong, Seoul, ○○○-dong, 312-254, and in return for the provision of the land as a substitute for the apartment and its ancillary and welfare facilities. In this case, the land to be provided to the Defendant ○○ General Construction refers to the land in a state that the Defendant Cooperative secured the ownership of the land and the right to use the site, thereby not hindering the commencement of construction

2. Defendant ○○ General Construction provides the Defendant Union with necessary project expenses on the site referred to in paragraph (1) provided by the Defendant Union in accordance with the design documents, terms and conditions of the contract, etc. approved by the head of the competent local government, and the construction of the building facilities, and the construction of the building facilities on the land provided by the Defendant Union. The remaining building facilities shall be sold in general in lots and appropriated from the construction cost and the project cost (hereinafter referred to as the “construction cost”). However, Defendant ○ General Construction may not claim against the Defendant Union even if any loss

3. The defendant ○○ Construction shall pay the relocation expenses out of its own funds to each of the households of the defendant association within seven days after signing the contract, with interest-free interest of twenty million won, and the additional generation shall pay the additional interest-free interest of twenty million won, and the defendant association shall bear the interest on the loan from the financial institution due to the mediation of the defendant ○○ General Construction.

D. Around 2005, the Defendant Union entered into a rebuilding share agreement (hereinafter “instant share agreement”) with Defendant ○○○○○○○○ Construction to determine the relationship of rights and obligations between the parties to the instant rebuilding project. Of them, the part relating to the instant case is as follows.

Article 8 (Supervision over Authorization and Permission Affairs)

1. All affairs related to the reconstruction project of this case, including authorization and permission, shall be supervised by the defendant partnership in the name of the joint project undertakers, but the defendant ○○ Comprehensive Construction shall bear the expenses and actively cooperate therein.

Article 9 (Adjustment of Civil Affairs, etc.)

1. The rearrangement of rights to previous land, etc., the preservation of apartment and welfare facilities occupied by the association members after the completion of construction facilities shall be treated as the responsibility and expense of the defendant association or the members of the defendant association, and the expenses for cadastral adjustment by a survey, the expenses for the registration and cancellation of a geological inspection trust, the expenses for the securing of ownership of a person who does not agree with the resolution for reconstruction, the expenses for preservation, registration and adjustment of general apartment and welfare facilities, and other public affairs after the completion of construction facilities, shall be the responsibility

Article 12 (Subsidization of Project Expenses)

1. The defendant union and the defendant ○ integrated construction will decide on the subsidization of the following business expenses through mutual consultation:

(4) The cost of preservation registration and taxes corresponding to the shares of the Defendant Union shall be borne by the Defendant Union to cover various registration costs, taxes and public charges for the remaining general apartment units, etc. for the remaining general apartment units.

Article 15 (Sale by Units)

1. Within 30 days after the establishment of the management and disposal plan under Article 14, the defendant association shall complete the contracts for sale of floors, lakes, lots, and the sale of goods by association members in the presence of police officers on the basis of the principle of open interest in consultation with the comprehensive construction of defendant

2. If the size of the building facilities sold in lots exceeds or falls short of the size of payment in kind, the difference shall be settled, and the liquidation money shall be paid before the day and move in: Provided, That if the schedule for the payment of liquidation money of the defendant association is somewhat late, the defendant association and the defendant ○○ Construction may move in through consultation;

3. Where a member of the association subject to the supply of an apartment fails to comply with the drawing lots or fails to conclude a sales contract within 15 days from the date of conclusion of the sales contract, the defendant association shall be deemed to have no intention to purchase the apartment, and the building facilities shall be disposed of in accordance with the rules on housing supply.

4. Under the construction specifications of apartment buildings (a separate attachment of detailed details) sold to the members of the Defendant Union, Defendant ○○ General Construction, as soon as possible, shall install samples on the second floor of the structural frame.

5. Under the general sale plan, Defendant ○○ Construction is responsible for and publicity of sales advertisements and production of promotional materials at the expense of Defendant ○○○ Construction.

Article 16 (General Sale in Lots)

1. To sell the remaining building facilities to the members of the defendant association in lots, and the time of sale in lots, methods of sale in lots, procedures, etc. shall comply with the rules on housing supply, and the general sale price shall be determined by the comprehensive construction of defendant ○ in accordance with

2. The payment of the purchase price in general shall be determined by the agreement between the defendant union and the defendant ○○ Construction through the opening of a joint account by the defendant union and the defendant ○○ Construction, and the management of the passbook by the defendant ○○ Construction.

3. As for the unsold portion of general apartment units, ancillary or welfare facilities, etc. by the date of occupancy, Defendant ○ General Construction shall be responsible and managed;

4. All other profits generated from members, contributions, overdue charges, etc. of the purchase price shall be the revenue of Defendant ○ Comprehensive Construction.

Article 41 (Other Matters)

2.The method of this contract shall be the share system: Provided, That the defendant union shall not bear any share of the charges and all costs specified in the contract provisions.

E. From September 2005, Defendant ○○ Construction commenced the instant apartment construction project and completed it on or around May 2007.

F. On the other hand, each part of the apartment of this case, which is part of the share of the members of the association

The registration of preservation of ownership in the name of the relevant Defendants, including the Defendant union and the Defendant ○○ Construction, or the Defendant ○○ Construction and the Defendant ○○ Construction as co-owners of each 1/2 share of each 1/2 shares, was completed on the following order: (i) the registration of preservation of ownership was completed by a request for registration according to the provisional attachment decision or provisional disposition decision, etc., which was issued by the Defendant ○○○○, etc., under the registration of the attached Table 3 without obtaining approval for the use under the Building Act with an sequence attached to the individual real estate (hereinafter referred to as the “instant real estate”), and (ii) the registration was completed in the name of the relevant Defendants, including the remaining Defendant ○○ Construction Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as the “Defendant ○○”) (However, the registration was completed in the name of the deceased ○○, the inheritee, who died before the instant lawsuit was filed)

G. On September 10, 2015, the Defendant Cooperative’s instant apartment from the head of ○○○○○ head of the Seoul Special Metropolitan City.

A certificate of usage was issued.

[Reasons for Recognition]

○ As to Defendant 5, 8, 9, and 12: Article 150(3) of the Civil Procedure Act (Confession)

○ With respect to the remaining Defendants u300: the facts without dispute, Gap 1, 2, 3, 8, 11, 12, 17, 19, and the purport of the whole pleadings and arguments

2. Whether the part of the plaintiffs' respective claims for confirmation of ownership is legitimate in the lawsuit of this case

The plaintiffs are original acquisitors of each of the instant real estate corresponding to the sequences in their complaint 1). The plaintiffs asserted that each of the instant real estate was invalid, and each of the instant real estate was owned by the defendant association, the non-party association, the non-party association, the non-party association, the non-party ownership registration of ○○ Construction (the plaintiff ○○○○, Kim○, Kim○, ○○, ○○, ○○, ○○, ○○, ○○, ○○, ○○, ○○, and Kim○), the defendant association, and the ○○ integrated construction (the plaintiff ○○, ○○, ○○, Kim○, ○, ○, ○, and ○○, ○○, and Kim○○). The plaintiffs asserted that each of the instant real estate was owned by each of the above defendants, and therefore, they are examined ex officio as to its legitimacy

If the plaintiff's legal status is unstable and dangerous, it is recognized that it is the most effective and appropriate means to determine by judgment to eliminate such unstable and danger when the plaintiff's legal status is unstable and dangerous.

1) For instance, for instance, the Plaintiff 1 ○○○○ is the original acquisitor of the entire real estate of this case, and Plaintiff 2 Kim○○ is the original acquisitor of the entire real estate of this case, and the Plaintiff 14 Kim○○○ is the original acquisitor of the entire real estate of this case. It is the original acquisitor of the entire 14 real estate of this case. See the attached Table 3. A lawsuit for confirmation may be brought, even though it is possible to bring an action for confirmation, it is not a final solution of the dispute, and therefore there is no benefit of confirmation (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2005Da60239, Mar. 9, 2006).

In light of the above legal principles, as long as the plaintiffs sought the cancellation of each registration of ownership preservation, which was completed in the name of each of the above defendants, against the defendant union, defendant union, ○○ comprehensive construction (the plaintiff ○○○, Kim○○, ○○○, ○○○, ○○○, ○○○, ○○○, ○○○, ○○, ○○○, ○○, ○○○, ○○, ○○○, ○○○, ○○○, ○○○), or the defendant union, or the defendant union, or ○○ integrated construction (the plaintiff ○○, ○○, ○○, ○○, ○○, ○○, ○○○, ○○○, ○○○, ○○, and ○○○, ○○). As such, the plaintiffs' filing a lawsuit seeking confirmation of ownership registration against each of the above defendants does not constitute a final resolution method of dispute. Therefore, the part of the lawsuit in this case is unlawful.

3. The plaintiffs' assertion

For the following reasons, the Plaintiffs asserted that each of the above Defendants’ respective registration of preservation of ownership of the Defendant Union, ○○ General Construction, or ○○ General Construction, which was completed on each of the instant real estate as indicated in the registration statement for the following reasons, is null and void, and seek implementation of the registration procedure for cancellation of each of the above registration of preservation of ownership against each of the above Defendants. On the other hand, against the pertinent Defendants, who completed the registration of cancellation of the above registration of establishment of ownership, provisional attachment registration, seizure registration, and the registration of cancellation of compulsory auction order, etc., the Plaintiffs sought consent for the registration of cancellation of each of the above registration of preservation of ownership (see, e.g., the detailed claims by the parties and each of the real estate are stated in the registration statement in the attached Table 3).

A. The plaintiffs' original acquisition of each real estate of this case

As a member of the defendant association, each of the real estate of this case, as the price for the land and building in which the plaintiffs invested in kind through the association articles and the procedures such as the drawing of floors and numbers of each of the real estate of this case under the share agreement of this case and the unit sale contract for cooperative members, the plaintiffs should complete the registration of preservation of ownership on each of the relevant real estate of this case in the future of the plaintiffs. Nevertheless, each of the registration of preservation of ownership on the real estate of this case as stated in the attached Table 3, 6, 10, 11, and 14, as for the real estate of this case, as for the real estate of this case, each of the registration of preservation of ownership as co-owners of the defendant association and ○○ integrated construction, and the registration of preservation of ownership was completed as co-owners for the real estate of this case, the defendant association and ○ integrated construction, and the above registration of preservation of ownership was invalid.

(b) Failure to perform the additional registration obligation;

Each registration of preservation of ownership of each real estate of this case should be completed at the same time, but each registration of preservation of ownership should be completed in addition to prohibited matters under Article 40 of the Housing Act, but each of the above registration of preservation did not complete additional registration of prohibition in the process of being conducted by the person who has the right of provisional seizure or provisional disposition. In this regard, each of the above registration of preservation of ownership is null and void.

4. Determination

A. Whether the plaintiffs are the original acquisitor of each real estate of this case

1) Relevant legal principles

Where a registration has been made on a certain real estate, it shall be presumed that it has been made lawfully in the cause and procedure unless there are any special circumstances (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2001Da72029, Feb. 5, 2002). Meanwhile, ownership of a new building is in principle the original acquisition of a building by a person who has built it in his/her own effort and materials (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2009Da66990, Jan. 28, 2010). Even if the construction of a new building is completed in a new building contract with his/her own effort and materials, if the contractor and the contractor agree to vest in the subcontractor the ownership of the completed building, such as granting a construction permit under the name of the contractor and granting a registration of respect for ownership, the ownership of the building shall be reverted to the contractor at the time (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2014Da36153, Sept. 4,

In order for divided ownership to be established for one building, there exists one building in an objective and physical aspect, the divided part of the building should be independent in its structure and use, and the physically partitioned part of the building should be the object of divided ownership. Here, the act of division is a kind of legal act that intends to divide the specific part of the building into the object of divided ownership without changing the physical form and quality of the building. It is not a special restriction on the time and method, but it is recognized if the intention of division is objectively indicated, even before the physical completion of the divided building, if the intention of division is objectively indicated that the building will be a divided building in the future through the application for building permission or the contract for sale in lots, etc., even before the physical completion of the divided building, and even if the building is registered in the aggregate building register or has not been registered in the register, it can be recognized that the divided ownership is established at that point (see, e.g., Supreme Court en banc Decision 2017Da71578, Jan. 17, 2013).

Meanwhile, a reconstruction association established under the Act on Ownership and Management of Condominium Buildings and the former Housing Construction Promotion Act (wholly amended by the Housing Act, Act No. 6916 of May 29, 2003) is an association which is not a juristic person with the aim of removing an existing old-age building and implementing a reconstruction project, and land owned by its members in the project area is invested in kind in the reconstruction association, and on the premise that the above ground housing shall be demolished following the implementation of the project. Therefore, in implementing a construction contract where a reconstruction association concludes and implements a construction project to construct an aggregate building on the site invested by its members between a construction company and a construction company, it does not mean that a third party, not a contracting party, provided a part of the new construction fund, and it does not mean that an original acquisitor acquires the sectional ownership of a specific part of the newly constructed aggregate building, but it is necessary to determine the original acquisitor by examining all the provisions of the regulations of the reconstruction association and the construction contract (see Supreme Court Decision 2003Da3072, Jul. 22, 2005).

2) Determination

According to Gap evidence No. 4 and No. 7, on February 6, 2007, the plaintiffs entered into a unit building register for each of the instant real estate on September 10, 2015 with respect to each of the instant real estate by drawing lots, and entered into a partner sales contract for each of the instant real estate on September 10, 2015. The plaintiffs paid acquisition tax on each of the instant real estate in 2012 through 2013. On September 2015, it is recognized that the collective building register for each of the instant real estate was prepared by designating the plaintiffs as their owners.

However, the following circumstances are revealed in the underlying facts as seen earlier and in the argument of this case:

① According to Articles 5, 8, and 10 of the articles of association of the association, members of the association stipulate that they shall own the land and buildings in the project zone for the defendant association for the implementation of the project. The funds for the implementation of the reconstruction project shall be raised from the members of the association in addition to the land invested by the members of the association. ② According to Article 35 of the articles of association, the members of the association may register the real estate owned by the defendant association for the efficient implementation of the project (see the above provisions of the association's articles of association, which are owned by the plaintiffs as the trustee of the existing ○○○○○○○○, as well as the above provisions of the association's articles of association.) The trust property shall be transferred wholly to the trustee of the above ○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○ Association within the unit 5th unit, and shall be transferred to the owner of the trust property at the time of completion of the contract, and the remaining expenses for the sale of the apartment building shall be determined by the defendant association within the remaining period of sale.

Therefore, the plaintiffs' assertion that each real estate of this case is owned respectively by the plaintiffs.

Part of the argument cannot be accepted.

B. Whether the failure of the supplementary registration becomes a ground for nullifying the registration of initial ownership

Article 40 of the Housing Act only provides for the business entity's obligation to apply for a supplementary registration system, and it does not provide any penal provision to indirectly enforce the implementation thereof, and ultimately, it does not provide for the provision to enforce legal effect through the legal fiction, and thus, the issue of whether a supplementary registration has been made is left to the faithful voluntary performance of the business entity. The general creditor of the business entity exercises the creditor's right of subrogation to secure the debtor's liability property regardless of the business entity's intent (or against his/her will). If the additional registration is applied for together at the time of application for the subrogation, the exercise of the creditor's right of subrogation itself would result in the waiver of the purpose of subrogation of the above liability property. In addition, if the general creditor of the business entity exercises his/her right to exercise a non-registered house constructed by the housing construction project in the form of direct compulsory execution, it cannot be deemed that there is no provision on the additional registration in combination with the business entity (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2007Da3637, Aug. 27, 2007).

According to the above legal principles, with respect to each of the instant real property, the Defendant Association, Defendant ○ General Construction; or

The registration of preservation of ownership of Defendant ○○ Construction’s general construction’s ownership was completed, and each of the above registration of preservation of ownership cannot be deemed as null and void as a matter of course solely on the ground that the additional registration of prohibition was not completed.

Therefore, this part of the plaintiffs' assertion cannot be accepted.

5. Conclusion

Therefore, each claim of this case by the plaintiffs, such as the statement in the "statement of claim" in attached Table 3 for each of the plaintiffs, is unlawful. As such, the part of the claim for ownership confirmation against the defendant union, ○○ General Construction or ○○ General Construction among the lawsuit of this case is dismissed. ② The remaining claims against the defendant union, ○○ General Construction or ○ General Construction, or ○○ General Construction, which is premised on the invalidation of the cause of the registration of ownership preservation, and each claim against the other of the pertinent defendants is dismissed as long as it is not acknowledged as the above premise, it is without any reason to further examine them. It is so decided as per Disposition.