Res judicata of a final and conclusive judgment dismissing a claim for registration of transfer shall affect only the judgment in the disposition that there is no claim for registration.

The res judicata effect of a final and conclusive judgment dismissing a claim for registration of transfer shall affect only the judgment on the text that there is no claim for registration.

Article 202 of the Civil Procedure Act

Supreme Court Decision 68Da591 delivered on June 11, 1968

Plaintiff 1 and two others

Egrasul

Red Support in the First Instance, Seoul High Court Decision 67Na2453 delivered on November 21, 1968

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal shall be borne by the defendant.

The Defendant’s agent’s ground of appeal is health;

According to Gap evidence Nos. 6 and 7 (Judgment) of 1963, the plaintiff 1 was aware that the plaintiff 1 did not file a claim for the execution of the procedure for ownership transfer registration on the ground of the contract concluded between the defendant, and that the defendant was dismissed. According to Gap evidence Nos. 8 and 9 (Evidence and Final Confirmation) of 1963, the non-party 1, who was adopted as evidence by the above second judgment, was convicted of perjury. According to the evidence No. 10 (Judgment) of 1963, the defendant did not have a duty of res judicata effect on the plaintiff 2 and 3, who was cultivated by the defendant, and it is clear that the non-party 1 was remanded to the court below that the non-party 1, who did not have a duty of res judicata effect on the plaintiff 1, 1963, and the non-party 1, who did not have a duty of res judicata effect after being remanded to the court below's judgment. According to the above evidence, the court below erred in the judgment below's judgment as to the above non-party 1 and the above.

2. health care unit;

According to the evidence stated in the original judgment, it can be known that the joint tort between the defendant and the non-party franchising is established as in the original judgment. Therefore, there is no error of law recognizing facts without evidence in the original judgment.

Therefore, the appeal is 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.

[Judgment of the Supreme Court (Presiding Judge) Dog-Jak Kim Gyeong-ri, Kim & Kim