(a) Where the indication on the registration is not identical or similar to the actual building, the validity of such registration;

(b) Examples that the indication on the registration is not identical or similar to the actual building;

A. Whether the preservation registration of a building has the effect of disclosing a certain building is determined based on whether it is possible to recognize the identity of the building in question as an indication of such registration in light of the social concept. If the indication on the registration and the actual building's identity cannot be recognized because the difference between the location number, structure, horizontal number, etc. of the building is serious, the registration shall be null and void. Even if the auction is conducted based on the registration of invalidation and the successful bidder becomes successful, the successful bidder shall not acquire the ownership of the real building in question, which cannot be recognized as identical or similar to the indication on the registration.

B. “The actual building’s number, structure, use, and reputation” indicated in the registry “The sap sap sap sap 20 square meters for some wood sap sap sap sap sap sap sap sap sap sap sap sap sap sap sap sap 16 square meters per sap sap sap sap sap sap sap sap sap sap sap sap sap s

Article 131 of the Registration of Real Estate Act

A. Supreme Court Decision 78Da544 delivered on June 27, 1978

Plaintiff

Defendant

Suwon District Court Decision 84Na502 delivered on April 26, 1985

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal shall be borne by the plaintiff.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

The court below held that the building of this case for which the plaintiff sought a scam from scam evidence was constructed by the non-party 1, and its actual location and structure, and that the scam scam scam scam scam scam 6.12 square meters (20 square meters) for some scam scam scam scam scam scam scam scam scam scam scam scam scam scam scam scam scam scam 16 square meters for the above non-party's name, and that the registration of ownership was completed again under the above non-party 1's name as scam scam scam scam scam scam sap sap sap sk and 1976.3 square meters for this, and that the court below found the above judgment below's error was justified in finding of facts.

In addition, whether the preservation registration of a building has the effect of disclosing it to a public shall be determined by whether it is possible to recognize the identity of the building in question as an indication of such registration in light of social concept. If it is impossible to recognize the identity or similarity of the building because the difference between the indication on the registration and the actual building's location, structure, horizontal number, etc. is serious, the registration shall be null and void. Even if an auction is held based on the invalidation registration and an auction is held, the successful bidder shall not acquire ownership of the real building in question that cannot be recognized as identical or similar with the indication on the registration (see Supreme Court Decision 78Da544 delivered on June 27, 1978). The judgment below's rejection of the plaintiff's claim based on the above opinion that "( Address 1 omitted) is just in this case, and the non-party's claim based on the above 66.12 meters wide and 16.12 meters wide and 16.02 meters wide and 16.16.0.02.02.

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

Justices Kim Jong-sik (Presiding Justice)