(a) Method of cancelling the registration of provisional seizure;

B. Whether a person who has completed the provisional attachment registration may seek the cancellation of the provisional attachment registration against the person who has the right to register the provisional attachment, in case where the registry official accepted the objection of the person having the right to register the provisional attachment that the provisional registration constitutes the provisional registration for security even though the principal registration on the basis of the provisional registration for preserving the right to claim ownership (negative)

A. The entry and cancellation of the provisional seizure registration based on the decision of provisional seizure against immovables are the execution of provisional seizure against immovables, and the provisional seizure registration based on the decision of provisional seizure against immovables is conducted only by the original commission of the execution court. On the other hand, if the provisional seizure registration based on the decision of provisional seizure against immovables has been entered, even if the provisional seizure registration based on the decision of provisional seizure can not independently remove the execution, and the provisional seizure registration can only be cancelled by the cancellation or cancellation method of the decision of provisional seizure against the execution court. Thus, even though it is not necessary to seek revocation of provisional seizure separately because the decision of provisional seizure loses its effect for any reason, it is not possible to bring a lawsuit against the registration authority of provisional seizure to revoke the provisional seizure registration by entrustment according to the decision of revocation of execution by the execution court.

B. If a principal registration of ownership transfer was made on the basis of a provisional registration for preserving the right to claim ownership transfer registration, the provisional registration and the provisional registration made on the basis of the principal registration shall be cancelled ex officio without any need to examine the substantive legal relationship between the provisional registration and the registration of provisional seizure made on the basis of the registry official. If the above provisional registration accepted an objection by the registry official of provisional seizure that it constitutes the provisional registration of security and rendered an unreasonable decision not to cancel the registration, if the person who made the principal registration, as an interested party, files an objection under Article 178 of the Registration of Real Estate Act, and subsequently made an unreasonable decision not to cancel the provisional registration, it is unlawful to directly prosecute the provisional registration by a separate lawsuit

Registration of Real Estate Act, Articles 55, 175, 177, and 178 of the Registration of Real Estate Act, Article 226 of the Civil Procedure Act

Park pent-ok

Korea Exchange Bank, Inc.

1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

2. Litigation costs shall be borne by the plaintiff.

The defendant shall implement the procedure for cancellation registration of provisional attachment registration made on May 4, 1991 by the Seoul District Court Branch Branch of Seoul District Court No. 17150 with respect to the real estate stated in the attached list to the plaintiff.

1. The plaintiff, on March 6, 191, entered a preliminary promise to sell and purchase the real estate recorded in the separate attachment list (hereinafter "the real estate of this case"), which is owned by the right holder, on the same day with respect to the real estate of this case, as Seoul District Court support No. 8195, and the provisional registration (hereinafter "the provisional registration of this case") for preserving the right to claim ownership transfer registration as to the real estate of this case was made by the defendant against the above person, as the above court No. 91Ka4928, May 2 of the same year, and accordingly, on May 4 of the same year, as the above court No. 17150, the provisional attachment registration of this case was entered in the provisional attachment registration of this case, which was the defendant with the above right holder (hereinafter "the provisional attachment registration of this case") on the ground that the above provisional attachment registration of this case should not be cancelled until August 5 of the same year, 1998, the plaintiff asserted that the above provisional attachment registration of this case had no opportunity to acquire ownership registration of this case by the court.

2. We examine ex officio the provisional seizure registration based on the decision of provisional seizure and the cancellation thereof is the execution of provisional seizure. On the other hand, as long as provisional seizure registration based on the decision of provisional seizure has been entered, the creditor of provisional seizure cannot independently remove its execution, and the provisional seizure registration is cancelled only by the method of cancellation or cancellation of the decision of provisional seizure. Thus, even if the decision of provisional seizure has lost its effect for any reason, it is not necessary to seek cancellation of provisional seizure registration separately because it is not necessary to request cancellation of provisional seizure registration for this reason against the person who has the right to request provisional seizure registration of this case, the provisional seizure registration of this case can not immediately seek cancellation of provisional seizure registration against the person who has the right to request cancellation of provisional seizure registration of this case by requesting cancellation of provisional seizure registration of this case to the court of execution or the person who has the right to request provisional seizure registration of this case.

3. If so, the plaintiff's claim of this case, which is directly demanding the cancellation of the provisional seizure registration of this case against the defendant, is eventually unlawful and thus dismissed, and the costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiff who has lost. It is so decided as per Disposition.

Judges Jin-law