beta
Text
1.The judgment of the first instance shall be modified as follows:
Defendant (Appointed Party) and Appointed C shall be co-defendant D of the first instance trial.
Reasons
1. Judgment on the plaintiff's claim
A. The facts of recognition 1) D purchased the instant real estate from Hyundai Industrial Development Co., Ltd. on July 21, 1990 and completed the registration of ownership transfer on the ground of the said sale under the receipt No. 40107 of the Gwangju District Court received on October 7, 1992. 2) The Plaintiff entered into a contract to purchase the instant real estate from D around March 11, 1994, with the purchase of KRW 72,000,000, and the transfer registration was agreed to be completed in the name of E, the Plaintiff’s own consciousness, the Defendant, and the Selection.
3) Around April 1994, the Plaintiff entered into a title trust agreement with E and the Defendant, the appointed parties C with respect to the instant real estate. (4) Pursuant to each of the above agreements, the registration of ownership transfer was completed due to the sale on April 1, 1994, as the receipt of No. 28575 on April 25, 1994, with respect to each of the instant real estate under the name of E, the Defendant, and the first/5 shares.
5) E completed the registration of ownership transfer based on donation on November 10, 2008 under the name of the Defendant with respect to 1/10 shares among the instant real estate, as to 3/10 shares under the name of the Defendant, Gwangju District Court No. 186348, Nov. 10, 2008, which was received on November 10, 2008. (b) The Act on the Registration of Real Estate under Actual Titleholder’s Name (hereinafter “Real Estate Real Name Act”).
According to the above, in the case of a so-called three-party registered title trust, the existing title trust agreement and registration thereof becomes null and void upon the lapse of the grace period prescribed under the same Act, and as a result, the real estate held in title is returned to the seller as owned by the seller. As such, the seller can seek cancellation of the registration under the name of the seller, which is null and void. Meanwhile, the above law still remains valid after the lapse of the grace period since the seller and the title truster did not have any provision denying the validity of the sales contract between the seller and the title truster. Thus