The Republic of Korea has a duty to express his/her consent for the cancellation registration of ownership transfer registration.

As long as the provisional registration of this case has no effect due to the cancellation of agreement, the defendant Republic of Korea, who is a third party to the registration of cancellation, has a duty to express his/her consent to the cancellation of provisional registration of this case.

Article 24 of the National Tax Collection Act

2016 Mada12467 Cancellation of provisional registration

AA

Republic of Korea and 1

December 20, 2016

January 24, 2017

1. The Plaintiff:

A. Defendant BB performed the procedure for cancellation of provisional registration of ownership transfer registration, which was completed on December 1, 2015 by the receipt No. 94464, with respect to the real estate listed in the separate sheet, the Busan District Court, Seoul East District Court, and the Southern District Court, Seoul District Court.

B. The defendant Republic of Korea has expressed his/her intention to accept the registration of cancellation of the provisional registration for ownership transfer registration under Paragraph (a) above.

2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the Defendants.

Cheong-gu Office

The same shall apply to the order.

1. Claim against Defendant BB

(a) Indication of claims: To be as shown in the reasons for the claims;

(b) Applicable provisions of Acts: Judgment by public notice (Article 208 (3) 3 of the Civil Procedure Act);

2. Claim against Defendant Republic of Korea

In full view of the contents and the purport of the evidence Nos. 1 and 2 as a whole, it is acknowledged that there are the same facts as the reasons for the claim, and as long as the provisional registration of this case is not effective due to the cancellation of agreement, the defendant Republic of Korea, a third party who has interest in the above cancellation registration, shall counter

have the obligation to make an expression of consent.

Defendant Republic of Korea asserts that this constitutes a bona fide third party with respect to the cancellation of agreement, but provisional registration is only the priority preservation effect, and it does not have the substantive preservation effect. As such, Defendant Republic of Korea, who completed the additional registration of such provisional registration, shall not be deemed to have acquired complete rights by registration, etc. before the cancellation of the sales contract. Accordingly, Defendant Republic of Korea’s above assertion cannot

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim of this case shall be accepted for the reasons and it is so decided as per Disposition.