1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. The following facts may be found either in dispute between the parties or in full view of the purport of Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 3, 10, 12, 13, Gap evidence Nos. 4, 5, 6, 11, and the whole arguments:

On April 29, 1996, the Defendant completed the registration of provisional disposition on April 27, 1996, on the ground of the provisional disposition order (96Kadan6103) issued by the Gwangju District Court on April 27, 1996, with respect to B’s share 1/3 of the 4,655§³ (hereinafter “instant land”).

(Law No. 19380). (b)

B was delinquent in 238,705,380 won of local tax, and on February 3, 1997, the Nam-gu Seoul Metropolitan City Office completed the attachment registration on January 28, 1997 as to B’s share 1/3 of the instant land for the collection thereof.

The main sentence of Article 5(5) of the Gwangju Metropolitan City Framework Ordinance on Market Price provides that "a disposition taken by the head of the Gu to the delinquent market price under subparagraph 4 of paragraph (3) shall be deemed to have been made by the Mayor."

C. On October 1, 2013, the Plaintiff filed with the Gwangju District Court an application to seek the revocation of the above provisional disposition on the ground that “The decision of the provisional disposition satisfies the requirements for revocation under the main text of Article 715 and Article 706(2) of the former Civil Procedure Act (amended by Act No. 6626, Jan. 26, 2002) as a result of the lapse of ten years from the filing of the principal lawsuit after the enforcement of the lawsuit against the Defendant.”

(2013Kadan6185) On November 22, 2013, the Defendant filed a claim for ownership transfer registration with the Gwangju District Court.

However, on January 29, 2014, the above court rendered a decision to revoke the above provisional disposition on the ground that “the above provisional disposition satisfies the requirements for revocation under the above law, and thereafter, even if the defendant brought a lawsuit on the merits, it does not affect any requirements for revocation once the lawsuit on the merits was brought,” and the above decision was finalized on February 12, 2014.

On January 7, 2014, immediately before the date of the above decision, the Defendant withdrawn the lawsuit for the above claim. On January 10, 2014, the Defendant traded on April 3, 1995 as to A’s share 1/3 of the instant land.