1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

1. The reasoning for the court’s explanation of this case is as follows, except for the modification of Article 2(b) of the judgment of the court of first instance as to this case, and therefore, the same is acceptable in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. Parts to be corrected;

B. Determination 1) Where a transfer registration of ownership is completed with respect to any relevant legal real estate, unless there are special circumstances, it shall be presumed that it has been completed lawfully in its cause and procedure. The registrant is not only a third party, but also the former owner is presumed to have acquired ownership with due cause of registration. Thus, the disputing party shall assert and prove the grounds for invalidation (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 94Da10160, Sept. 13, 1994; 2001Da72029, Feb. 5, 2002). The claim for transfer registration of ownership in the name of the defendant company and the provisional registration of transfer of ownership in the name of the defendant company (hereinafter “transfer of ownership in the name of the defendant company”).

A) The Plaintiff asserts that both the registration of ownership transfer in Defendant B’s name is null and void should be reversed by proving the reason for invalidation. However, the registration of real estate is valid even if the current state of true rights is publicly announced without reflecting the process or form that led to such public announcement. Thus, in acquiring real estate from the former owner, the registration titleholder asserts that the form or process of the act of registration is somewhat different from that of the cause for registration, and the presumption of the registration cannot be said to be broken. Thus, even in such a case, the registration titleholder’s transfer of ownership was made against the will of the former registration titleholder, and thus, the registration becomes null and void (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 200Da3248, Mar. 3, 200).