[1] In a case where a transfer registration of ownership is made with respect to a part of the combined land before registering the combined land after completing the land annexation procedure, whether the owner of the pertinent land may jointly apply for the registration of combined land to share the land after the combination with the consent of the interested parties (affirmative)

[2] In a case where registration of ownership transfer has been made in sequence with respect to each parcel of land which was combined with land on the land cadastre but for which a registration of annexation has not been made, the case holding that since the owners of the relevant land may jointly file an application for registration of combination of land to share the land after combination with consent from the interested parties in accordance with the Registration of Real Estate Act, the lawsuit for confirmation of ownership filed by the owners against the previous owners does not have a benefit

[1] Article 90-4 (1) of the Registration of Real Estate Act / [2] Article 90-4 (1) of the Registration of Real Estate Act, Article 250 of the Civil Procedure Act

New Bank Co., Ltd. and one other (Law Firm Geosung, Attorneys Kang Sung-sung et al., Counsel for the plaintiff-appellant)

9 others than the Republic of Korea

Busan High Court Decision 2003Na9308 delivered on May 12, 2004

All appeals are dismissed. The costs of appeal are assessed against the plaintiffs.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

According to Article 90-4 (1) of the Registration of Real Estate Act newly established (amended by Act No. 7954, May 10, 2006) (amended by Act No. 7954, May 10, 2006), even in the case of registration of ownership transfer with respect to a part of the combined land before the combination of lots is registered, the owners of the relevant land may jointly file an application for registration of the combination of lots to jointly own the land after combination with a written consent of the interested parties who have the right to collateral security, provisional seizure, etc. on the register.

According to the facts acknowledged by the court below, the defendant Hocheoncheon-dong 12-5, Busan, and 2,478 square meters of land (hereinafter "12-5 land on the register") and 12-11 square meters of land on the same 12-11 square meters (hereinafter "12-11 land on the register"), and upon filing an application for annexation of each of the above lands on October 12, 1990, each of the above lands was combined with the land cadastre and was combined with the land cadastre and was closed as 12-5, 2,637 square meters on the register, but the land cadastre on the register was closed, but the registration register on the above two parcels remains again because the application for combined registration was not filed, and after the registration of share transfer was completed in sequence with the land registration on the 12-5-12-125-12-12-14-14-12-14-12-14-14-22-14-22-14-2, the plaintiffs' ownership registration.

Therefore, even if the defendants (other than the defendant Republic of Korea and the defendant Hocheon, the remaining defendants are those who completed the registration of ownership transfer on the plaintiffs' land 12-5,12-11 on the register after the defendant Hocheon and the defendant Hocheon) are subject to the ownership confirmation judgment of this case, it cannot resolve any inconsistency between land cadastre and the register, and thus, the judgment of the court below that the lawsuit of this case is unlawful as there is no benefit of confirmation, since Article 90-4 of the Registration of Real Estate Act was newly established after the judgment of the court below, it is just in its conclusion, but there is no error of law such as misunderstanding of legal principles.

Therefore, all appeals are 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 on the bench.

Justices Kim Hwang-sik (Presiding Justice)