The meaning of "the ownership of the land is actually transferred for compensation" under Article 2 subparagraph 2 of the Act on Special Measures for the Control of Real Estate Speculation".

The phrase "in fact that the ownership of the land under Article 2 subparagraph 2 of the Act on Special Measures for the Control of Real Estate Speculation is actually transferred for consideration" shall be deemed to mean that in the case of sale, the payment of the price of the land has been implemented to the extent that it can be deemed that the price of the land was paid almost all.

Article 2(2) of the Act on Special Measures for the Suppression of Real Estate (Abolition)

[Judgment of the court below]

Head of Yeongdeungpo Tax Office

Seoul High Court Decision 72Gu289 delivered on September 18, 1973

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal shall be borne by the defendant.

Judgment on the grounds of appeal by Defendant Litigation Performers

According to the reasoning of the judgment, since the original judgment did not have been paid to the Plaintiff as the sale price for the land, the original judgment was recognized that the sale contract for the land was not cancelled at the same time, and the Plaintiff did not perform the registration of ownership transfer for this real estate, and the contract for the transfer of this real estate is not determined to be implemented until the date of payment. Thus, the Plaintiff’s claim for payment of remaining land can not be seen as having been made definitely because the ownership of the land was not determined to the extent that the sale price for this case was not determined in accordance with the law, and it cannot be viewed that the Plaintiff’s claim for payment of the transferred land was not against the Plaintiff, and this disposition for payment of remaining land was not unlawful because the original judgment became final and conclusive in light of the records that the ownership of the land was not transferred to the Plaintiff, and thus, it cannot be viewed that there was no error in the misapprehension of legal principles as to the Plaintiff’s claim for payment of the transferred land, which is the transfer price for sale of this case’s land.

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.

Justices Cho Young-young (Presiding Justice)