Whether the registration of disposition on default takes precedence over the application for cancellation of ownership transfer, etc.

Since the delinquent taxpayer succeeded to 213 shares out of the land of this case owned by the delinquent taxpayer, the above attachment registration is valid as to the 213 shares of the delinquent taxpayer out of the land of this case in accordance with the substantive legal relationship. Thus, the defendant is obligated to express his/her intention to accept the registration of cancellation of ownership transfer completed in the name of the delinquent taxpayer with respect to the 111

Article 35 of the National Tax Collection Act priority

1. With respect to the registration of cancellation of ownership transfer registration completed under No. 51256, Oct. 6, 1994 with respect to the Plaintiff’s share of 11/13, out of 352 square meters in Pyeongtaek-si, 352, Dong-dong 352, Suwon District Court, Suwon District Court, the Defendant expressed his/her intention of consent to the Plaintiff.

2. The plaintiff's remaining claims are dismissed.

3. Of the costs of lawsuit, 2/13 shall be borne by the Plaintiff, and the remainder by the Defendant, respectively.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On January 17, 1981, Nonparty ○○, Nonparty ○, who was donated by Nonparty ○○, Nonparty ○○, Nonparty ○○○, the Cho○-dong, 352, and 813 square meters (hereinafter “the instant land”). Under the Act on Special Measures for the Registration, etc. of Real Estate Ownership, the registration of ownership transfer of the instant land was completed on the ground of the said donation, as Songwon District Court’s receipt No. 51256, Oct. 6, 1994, under the Act on Special Measures for the Registration, etc. of Real Estate Ownership. As to the said land, the registration of ownership transfer was completed on the ground of the said donation. The registration of the attachment registration was completed under the Defendant’s name, as the receipt of No. 11947, Mar. 4, 1996.

B. On February 16, 1957, Kim ○, a South-North Kim○, inherited the instant land independently. On July 23, 1994, Kim○ died and six persons, who were the wife and children of the instant land, jointly inherited the instant land, such as Kim○, Kim○, Kim○, Kim○, Kim○, Kim○, Kim○, Kim○, and Kim○.

C. On September 9, 1999, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the Daejeon District Court Branch 99Kadan8052, which sought the cancellation of the ownership transfer registration of the instant land against Kim ○○, and received a favorable judgment on September 9, 199, and the same judgment became final and conclusive around that time.

❲인정근거❳갑 1, 2, 3호증의 각 기재, 변론 전체의 취지

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The claimant's assertion

A. According to the above facts, the registration of transfer of ownership in the name of Kim○-○ with respect to the land of this case shall be cancelled as a cause invalidation. The defendant, who is a third party with interest in the registration, has a duty to express his/her consent to the cancellation of the above registration as an act of preservation of the jointly owned property, barring any special circumstance.

B. As to this, the defendant is not obligated to accept the registration of cancellation of the above transfer of ownership since he did not pay taxes and legally seize the land of this case.

In full view of the purport of the argument in Eul evidence No. 1, as a whole, Kim ○ was in arrears with the labor income tax of KRW 762.370, Nov. 16, 1995, and the defendant completed the attachment registration of the land of this case. As such, as seen earlier, Kim ○ succeeded to the 2/13 shares of the land of this case owned by Kim○○○, as seen earlier, as to the 2/13 share of the land of this case among the land of this case, the above attachment registration shall be valid in accordance with the substantive legal relationship.

The above defense is justified within the scope of the above recognition.

C. Therefore, the Defendant is liable to the Plaintiff for the declaration of consent on the registration of cancellation of ownership transfer registration completed in the name of Kim○○ with respect to the portion of 11/13 of the instant land.

4. Conclusion

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim is justified within the above scope of recognition, and the remaining claims are dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.