The case holding that the registration of transfer of ownership should be presumed to have been made by mistake, as alleged in the seller's assertion, in case where, after the conclusion of the sales contract for the seven parcels of land, the registration of transfer of ownership was completed, but it is clear that the land was not included in seven parcels of land, which is the object of sale, and the seller continues to occupy and use such land as his own property even after the buyer goes beyond the future.

After the conclusion of the sales contract for the seven parcels of land, the registration of transfer of ownership was completed due to the purchase and sale of the lots of land, but it is clear that the land is not included in the seven parcels of land, which is the object of the sale and purchase, and if the seller continues to occupy and use the land as his own property even after the buyer goes beyond the future, the registration of transfer of ownership should be presumed to have been registered by mistake, as alleged by the seller, unless the buyer proves that he could not exercise his ownership over the land or that he otherwise acquired the land.

Article 186 of the Civil Act, Article 187 of the Civil Procedure Act

Plaintiff 1 and 5 others, Counsel for the plaintiff-appellant

Defendant 1 and one other

Chuncheon District Court Decision 90Na2585 delivered on January 11, 1991

The judgment of the court below shall be reversed and the case shall be remanded to Chuncheon District Court Panel Division.

According to the reasoning of the judgment below, the court below held that: (a) although the Plaintiff’s prior Nonparty 1 sold seven lots of land, including the Plaintiff’s land ( Address 1 omitted) and ( Address 2 omitted) to Nonparty 2 on January 1, 1970, the land of this case was not included in the subject matter of sale; (b) thereafter, the land of this case was not included in the subject matter of sale; and (c) on October 2, 1972, 14740 with a thickness of 14740, the main branch court of the Chuncheon District Court received the main support on September 20, 1972, the registration of ownership transfer was completed; (d) on the land adjacent to the site ( Address 3 omitted); (e) the land of this case where Nonparty 1 resided and the ownership transfer registration of the above non-party 2 continued to exist even after the completion of the registration of ownership transfer; and (e) there was no error in finding the ownership transfer registration of the above land and the right of this case as the land of this case.

However, if the land purchased and sold like the judgment of the court below is seven parcels, and it is clear that it is not included in the subject matter of the sale, and the excluded land is an adjacent garden to the house site in which the seller was residing, and even after the registration exceeds the buyer's future, if the seller continues to occupy and use the same as his own property and the seller's death, and the plaintiffs were succeeded to after the seller's death, the registration of transfer of ownership shall be presumed to have been registered as transfer by mistake, such as the plaintiff's head, unless the defendant asserts that he could not exercise his ownership over the land in this case or that he otherwise acquired the land.

However, according to the records, the defendant did not have any assertion on such circumstances, and according to the testimony of the non-party 3 by the witness who was not rejected by the court below, the fact that the non-party 1 would not purchase the land in question outside the prescribed limit of the defendant 1 is the time for the non-party 2 to purchase the land in question. Thus, the above decision of the court below is erroneous in the misapprehension of legal principles as to the actual presumption, and there is a good reason

Therefore, the judgment of the court below is reversed, and the case is remanded to the court below for a new trial and determination. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating judges.

The presiding judge Kim Jong-soo, Kim Jae-soo, Lee Jae-sung