1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is the owner of the instant real estate.

B. On July 16, 2015, B Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Nonindicted Co., Ltd.”) completed the provisional registration of the right to claim ownership transfer (hereinafter “instant right to claim ownership transfer”) on the ground of trade reservation on the same day (hereinafter “instant provisional registration”) with respect to the instant real estate.

C. On April 27, 2018, the Defendant seized the right to claim the transfer of ownership against the Plaintiff of the non-party company, the provisional registration of which was completed on April 27, 2018, and accordingly, the instant seizure registration was completed on the same day.

After the registration of the seizure of this case by the Defendant, the Plaintiff asserted that the Plaintiff and the non-party company had entered into a pre-sale agreement with respect to the real estate of this case, and filed a lawsuit against the non-party company seeking the implementation of the provisional registration of this case under the Suwon District Court Decision 2018Da554396, Suwon District Court, claiming that the provisional registration

On March 7, 2019, the above court rendered a favorable judgment of Plaintiff (a non-litigation) and the above judgment became final and conclusive as it is.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 2, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion is that the provisional registration of this case is null and void as a registration completed according to a false conspiracy between the Plaintiff and the Nonparty Company. As such, the provisional registration of this case based on the provisional registration of this case is also null and void

Therefore, the Defendant is obligated to implement the registration procedure for cancellation of the instant seizure registration to the Plaintiff.

B. Article 108(1) of the Civil Act provides that a false declaration of intent made in collusion with the other party shall be invalidated. Paragraph (2) of the same Article provides that the invalidation of such declaration of intent shall not be asserted against a bona fide third party. Here, a third party is presumed in good faith, barring any special circumstance.