Where the ownership is transferred by selling the farmland which belongs to another person's name borrowed from the third person's name to a third person after the completion of the repayment, and the transfer of ownership.

Where a person completes the registration of ownership transfer on the ground of the completion of repayment under his/her own name, he/she shall be deemed to own the land, unless the disposition of non-performance against the other person is revoked. Therefore, the purchaser of the land may acquire the ownership of another person, regardless of his/her knowledge or knowledge, and oppose the third party by completing the registration of ownership transfer.

Article 94 of the Civil Act

Freeboard Dong

Changes in the past;

Cheongju District Court Decision 57 civil defense 753, 754 delivered on December 28, 1957, Cheongju District Court Decision 57 civil defense Gong754 delivered on December 28, 1957

According to the statement of facts in the first instance court that cited part of the record and the original judgment, the defendant's assertion was acquired by transfer from the Cheongju Agricultural School, which is farmland to which the defendant belongs. However, in obtaining non-party's farmland from the government, only the name of the beneficiary was the non-party who is the plaintiff's employee. The non-party terminated the registration of transfer of ownership due to the plaintiff's unlawful completion of its own name, and it is obvious that the non-party's ownership in this case is in the defendant. Thus, even if the non-party is the non-party, such as the defendant's head, the non-party is the non-party's ownership in this case as long as the non-party's name is not revoked, the non-party's ownership is the non-party's ownership in this case. However, since the non-party's obligation to transfer the ownership to the defendant according to the agreement with the defendant and the non-party, the plaintiff is merely the one that the plaintiff knew or did not know the situation between the plaintiff and the plaintiff, and it cannot be justified.

Justices Kim Du-il (Presiding Justice)