(a) Scope of application of Article 8 (2) of the Act on Special Measures for Transfer of Real Estate Ownership;

B. Purport of the proviso of Article 10(1) of the Enforcement Decree of the Act on Special Measures for Transfer of Real Estate Ownership

A. In full view of the legislative intent of the Act on Special Measures for the Registration, etc. of Real Estate Ownership, and the institutional purport of a letter of guarantee to be attached to a guarantor's guarantee in order to secure the authenticity of the real relation of rights of the pertinent real estate at the time of application for the registration of real estate ownership transfer and that the pertinent real estate falls under the scope of application of the same Act, and the relevant provisions of the same Act and the Enforcement Decree, the provision of Article 8 (2) of the same Act that "in case where the State or a local government intends to register the preservation of ownership of State or public real estate or to obtain a certificate from the competent authority to apply for the registration of ownership transfer, it may not be attached to the certificate." However, the provision that applies to the case where the State or a local government applies for the issuance of a certificate with respect to the real estate already owned by the State or a local government but whose name is not yet registered as the State or a local government.

B. However, in the case of state-owned or public real estate, the proviso of Article 10(1) of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act shall be attached to a certificate of the fact of sale of state-owned or public real estate in attached Form 5 issued by the managing authority of the pertinent real estate. The purport of Article 10(2) of the same Act and Article 5 of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act is to attach a certificate of the fact of sale of state-owned or public real estate in addition to a certificate of the sale of state-owned or public real estate issued separately by the relevant real estate management authority where the private person who is transferred State-owned or public real estate by the State or local government applies for the issuance of a certificate as the actual owner.

(a) Article 8 (2) of the Act on Special Measures for the Registration, etc. of Ownership Transfer;

Plaintiff

Head of Assignment

Daejeon High Court Decision 93Gu1945 delivered on April 22, 1994

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the plaintiff.

We examine the grounds of appeal.

In full view of the legislative intent of the Act on Special Measures for the Registration, etc. of Ownership of Real Estate (Act No. 4502, Nov. 30, 1992; hereinafter the same) and the legislative purport of a letter of guarantee to be attached to an application for the issuance of a certificate, and the relevant provisions of the Act and the Enforcement Decree of the same Act (hereinafter referred to as the "Decree") in order to secure the authenticity of the real estate in question at the time of application for the issuance of a certificate, the actual legal relationship of rights and duties of the real estate at the time of application for the registration of ownership transfer, and the right and duties of the real estate concerned at the time of application for the issuance of a certificate, the provisions of Article 8 (2) of the Act need not be attached to the certificate of guarantee if the transferee of the real estate falls under the scope of application for the issuance of a certificate, and the provisions of Article 10 (2) of the Decree of the Act shall not be deemed to apply to the State or a local government for the issuance of a certificate of ownership transfer.

The judgment of the court below to the same purport is correct, and there is no error in the misapprehension of legal principles as to the letter of guarantee under the Act, Article 8 (2) of the Act, and the proviso of Article 10 (1) of the Decree, by erroneously understanding the purport of the enactment of the Act, such as the theory of lawsuit. There is no ground

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed and all costs of appeal are assessed against the losing party. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.

Justices Jeong Jong-ho (Presiding Justice)