In case where the title trust relationship is terminated as a result of the termination of the title trust relationship as a single ownership registration for any one of the lands divided after the sale and purchase of part of one parcel of land by specifying the ownership and the transfer registration for shares for the convenience of the whole part is completed, whether the title trust relationship is terminated as to the remaining land

In a case where a share transfer registration for the whole part of a parcel of land is made while a part of the land is specified and sold, the share registration for the part other than the specific part is in a mutual title trust relationship. Even though the title trust relationship is terminated as the provisions of law or the sole ownership transfer registration for any one of the lands divided after the date is completed due to the cancellation of trust, the title trust relationship with respect to the remaining divided land is not resolved.

Article 186 of the Civil Act / [title trust]

[Plaintiff-Appellant-Appellee] Plaintiff 1 and 1 other (Law Firm Gyeong, Attorneys Park Dong-young et al., Counsel for plaintiff-appellant-appellant-appellee)

[Defendant-Appellant] Kim Jong-tae, Counsel for defendant-appellant

Kim Young-ju et al., Counsel for the defendant-appellant-appellee

Incheon District Court Decision 89Na3496 delivered on May 11, 1990

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the plaintiff.

As to the Plaintiff’s ground of appeal

In a case where the transfer of shares, etc. is made with respect to the whole part of a parcel of land for convenience while specifying and selling part of a parcel of land, the share registration with respect to the part other than the specific part is in a mutual title trust relation (see Supreme Court Decision 86Da59, 86Meu307, Aug. 23, 198). Since the provision of law or the registration of share transfer due to the termination of trust has been completed with respect to any one of the parcels of land divided after the date, the title trust relation has been terminated.

With respect to this case, the non-party title trust relationship was established through the registration of transfer of ownership for 804/1,554 shares out of the total land under convenience while the non-party title trust relationship was naturally terminated as to this case's land since the non-party title trust relationship in this case's land was terminated as a matter of course, and the plaintiff acquired the private ownership and the registration of invalidity without any cause for the share transfer under the above title trust cannot be said to be established, even though the title trust relationship in this case's land was terminated as to this case's land.

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim on the land of this case under the premise that the registration of share in the title of this order is null and void due to the distribution of farmland as to the land of this case 405-1, 000, and the judgment of the court below that made the same conclusion is justifiable. The arguments are without merit.

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 Yoon Young-young (Presiding Justice)