The presumption of registration under the Act on Special Measures for the Transfer of Forest Ownership, which has been made after the death of the former owner;

As long as a registration has been made pursuant to the Act on Special Measures for the Registration of Forest and Forest Ownership in respect of real estate, it shall be limited to two months from the date of birth, and even if the registration has been made after the death of the former owner, it shall not depict the presumption of such registration.

Article 10 of the Act on Special Measures for the Transfer of Forest Ownership (Abolition of Act No. 2111)

[Judgment of the court below]

Defendant

Gwangju District Court Decision 87Na619 delivered on February 12, 198

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the defendant.

We examine the grounds of appeal.

The judgment of the court below is justified in light of the records, since the real estate of this case was owned by the deceased non-party 1, and after the registration of transfer of ownership was made in accordance with the Act on Special Measures for the Registration of Forest and Forest Ownership, the defendant has confirmed that the registration of transfer was completed in accordance with the Act on Special Measures for the Registration of Transfer of Real Estate Ownership by false guarantee, etc. even though the defendant did not purchase the real estate of this case from the plaintiff, and there is no error of

As long as the registration was made pursuant to the Act on Special Measures for the Registration of Forest Ownership in the future of the plaintiff with respect to the real estate of this case, it is difficult for the plaintiff to sell the real estate within two months after the birth, and even if the registration was made after the death of the above non-party 1, the presumption of the registration alone cannot be broken.

Even if the registration that was made in the future of the defendant is valid as the assertion is valid, unless there is no proof that the registration that was made in the future of the plaintiff is invalid, the defendant ultimately has the status of the second purchaser after the purchase of the same real estate. Therefore, there is no error of law by misunderstanding legal principles as pointed out in the judgment below to the same effect. All arguments are groundless

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed, and the costs of appeal are assessed against the losing party. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.

Justices Ansan-man (Presiding Justice)