beta
Text
1. Revocation of a judgment of the first instance;
2. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.
3. The total costs of the lawsuit shall be borne by the defendant.
Reasons
1. The reasoning of the judgment of the first instance court of the basic facts is as follows: 1. The basic facts are as follows: (a) through (c).
2. Whether the lawsuit of this case is lawful
A. Since a change in the name of the building owner in the name of the building owner is necessary for continuing the construction of the building on the unbuilt building or for registration of ownership preservation in accordance with the Registration of Real Estate Act, etc. after the completion of the construction work, the transferee of the building under construction shall be deemed to have a benefit in lawsuit against the transferor. However, in the case of the building for which the construction is completed and the registration of ownership preservation has been completed, there is no longer a need for change in the name of the building owner. Moreover, even if the name of the building owner is changed because it is not the method of public announcement of the acquisition and loss of the substantive right to the building, but the ownership is not estimated, it does not affect the substantial legal relationship of the building (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 88Meu6754, May 9, 1989). Thus, there is no benefit in lawsuit to
I would like to say.
(2) In light of the above legal principles, if a building owner completed a construction project that can be seen as an independent building, but the registration of ownership preservation has been completed without completing all necessary procedures, such as various reports, applications, etc. under the Building Act until the lawful use thereof, the original acquisitor of the building can complete the construction in accordance with the permitted contents under the Building Act by changing the name of the owner of the building in his/her own name and implementing all kinds of reports, applications, etc. remaining in his/her name under the Building Act. Thus, in such a case, a lawsuit is brought to seek the implementation of the procedures for change of the owner’s name by asserting that the owner is a legitimate original acquisitor of the building.