1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

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

1. In the Plaintiff’s assertion, the instant building was already destroyed and lost, and the building ledger was cancelled on June 18, 2015, the Plaintiff sought implementation of the procedure for registration of destruction and loss of the instant building against the Defendant, who is the title holder on the registry of the said building, as the owner of the said building, as the Plaintiff was the owner of the land in Sungsung City, where the said building is located.

2. To examine, ex officio, the determination on the legitimacy of the lawsuit in this case; to apply for the registration of the ownership of the building within one month from the time the relevant fact occurs; and to apply for the registration in subrogation of the owner of the building in this case, if the said owner fails to apply for the registration within one month, the registration may be applied for by subrogation of the owner of the building

(Article 43(1) and (2) of the Registration of Real Estate Act. Accordingly, the Plaintiff, the owner of the instant building site, can apply for registration of direct destruction of the building by subrogation of the Defendant, the registered titleholder of the instant building. Therefore, there is no benefit in filing a lawsuit against the Defendant to seek implementation of registration of destruction of the instant building.

3. In conclusion, the lawsuit of this case is unlawful and thus, it is so decided as per Disposition.