1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Purport of claim and appeal

The judgment of the court of first instance.

1. The Plaintiff and B sought registration of the provisional registration of the right to claim a transfer of ownership (hereinafter “each provisional registration of this case”) against the Defendant, the third party having interests in the registration, as described in the purport of the claim, and sought a declaration of consent against the Defendant. The judgment of the court of first instance accepted the Plaintiff’s claim for the cancellation registration against C, but dismissed B’s claim and the Plaintiff’s claim against the Defendant, which were not the person entitled to registration of the cancellation registration, respectively.

Therefore, since only the plaintiff appealed against the part against it, the scope of the judgment of this court is limited to whether the defendant is obligated to express his/her consent to the registration of recovery of each provisional registration of this case.

2. The grounds for the court’s explanation on this part are as follows: (a) each of the “Defendant C” as “C; (b) the “Plaintiffs” as “Plaintiffs and B; (c) the “Plaintiff A” as “Plaintiffs”; and (d) the “Defendant Seocheon Saemaul Fund” as “Defendants”; and (c) the “Defendant Seocheon Saemaul Fund” as “Defendants,” and (d) the part corresponding to the judgment of the first instance is cited under the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

3. The assertion and judgment

A. The plaintiff's assertion that the defendant set up a right to collateral security with respect to each of the real estate of this case by granting a preferential, non-profit and convenient loan to C, and thus, the defendant is obligated to express his/her consent to the registration of recovery of each of the provisional registrations of this case as a third party with a interest in the registration

B. The facts that the Plaintiff cancelled each of the provisional registrations of this case in response to the proposal made by C are identical to the judgment of the court of first instance cited earlier, and thus, the registration of cancellation of each of the provisional registrations of this case was completed against the Plaintiff’s will and thus cannot be deemed null and void.

Therefore, it cannot be deemed that the Defendant is obliged to express his/her consent to the registration of recovery of each provisional registration of this case. CA, as alleged by the Plaintiff.