logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대법원 1980. 2. 13.자 79마412 결정
[등기공무원의처분에대한이의결정에대한재항고][집28(1)민,88;공1980.4.15.(630),12650]
Main Issues

Where the case does not fall under the case of registration;

Summary of Judgment

In Article 55 subparagraph 2 of the Registration of Real Estate Act, the phrase “where the case is not to be registered” refers to a case where it is obvious that the application for registration cannot be permitted by law in its purport itself. Therefore, in a case where the registration officer accepted the application for registration based on the protocol of protocol, and the entry is completed, the above protocol of protocol of protocol of protocol of protocol of protocol of protocol of protocol of protocol of protocol of protocol of protocol of protocol is implemented and the registration is invalid,

[Reference Provisions]

Article 55 subparagraph 2 of the Registration of Real Estate Act

Re-appellant

Wartime:

United States of America

Daejeon District Court Order 78Ma23 dated November 10, 1979

Text

The reappeal is dismissed.

Reasons

The Re-Appellant's ground for reappeal is examined.

Article 55 subparagraph 2 of the Registration of Real Estate Act provides that "the case shall not be registered" refers to the case where it is obvious that the application for registration cannot be permitted by law in its purport itself. As to the compromise protocol between the appellant and the person other than the appeal, which is the cause of the application for registration No. 85421, Dec. 13, 1977, concerning the land, the Daejeon District Court 73 Gahap325, Feb. 21, 1974, which was already received on April 10, 1974 and the above appellant No. 12088, the Re-appellant had already applied for the registration of the previous land 1,500, which was transferred to the person other than the appeal to transfer the ownership transfer registration of 80/1,500 of the 1,500 shares of the 800 shares, the conciliation protocol is just and it cannot be accepted as a legal ground of the above disposal protocol, apart from the case where the public official's appeal cannot be accepted.

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

Justices Dra-ro (Presiding Justice)

arrow