Procedures for cancelling the registration of transfer of ownership in the name of a third party, which was passed after provisional registration.

Although it is not appropriate to take the procedure prescribed in this Article for ex officio cancellation of the registration of ownership transfer in the name of a third party, which was completed after provisional registration before the completion of the registration of ownership transfer based on provisional registration, the registration officer completes the registration on the same day as the registration of ownership transfer cancellation.

Article 175 of the Registration of Real Estate Act

Re-appellant

Gwangju District Court Decision 67Ra42 delivered on October 4, 1967

The reappeal is dismissed.

The Re-Appellant's grounds for re-appeal are determined.

If a registry official intends to register ex officio the transfer of ownership in the name of a third party via a provisional registration after the provisional registration for preserving the right to claim a transfer of ownership intends to register ex officio, the procedure under Article 175 of the Registration of Real Estate Act should be followed after the completion of the principal registration of the above provisional registration. Thus, before the registry official completes the transfer of ownership in the name of the non-party holding the right to the provisional registration, to register ex officio the transfer of ownership in the name of the non-party holding the right to the provisional registration after the provisional registration, the procedure under Article 175 of the same Act shall not be correct. However, according to the records, it is clear that the registry official's registration of transfer of ownership in the name of the non-party holding the above non-party was completed on the same date, and the above measures taken by the registry official become legitimate. Accordingly, the re-appellant's judgment does not have any interest to dispute the above measures of the registry official, and there is no error in the misapprehension of the registration right or any error in the misapprehension of grounds for appeal.

Therefore, the reappeal is groundless, and it is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating judges.

Justices of the Supreme Court Dog-gu (Presiding Judge) Dog-Jak and Mag-gu Mag-gu