Where a lawsuit is withdrawn after a final judgment has been rendered on the merits, and where a preservative measure is revoked due to changes in circumstances.

If a lawsuit is withdrawn after the final judgment has been rendered on the merits, it is impossible to institute the same lawsuit, so the intention to preserve the case shall be deemed to have been finally waived, and it constitutes a reason to revoke provisional

Articles 706 and 715 of the Civil Procedure Act

Applicant

Respondent

With respect to a case of provisional disposition of real estate No. 74k (Serial omitted) in this Court, the decision of provisional disposition rendered by this Court on September 11, 1984 with respect to the real estate stated in the separate sheet shall be revoked.

Litigation costs shall be borne by the respondent.

Paragraph (1) may be provisionally executed.

It is as set out in paragraphs 1 and 2 of this Decree.

The Respondent filed an application for provisional disposition against the applicant and the applicant for non-applicant on September 11, 1974, and this Court rendered a provisional disposition against the two parcels including the real estate stated in the separate sheet, and the respondent filed a lawsuit against the applicant and the applicant for non-applicant for the provisional disposition on September 11, 1974, and the Respondent filed a lawsuit against the four persons including the applicant and the applicant for non-applicant for the transfer of ownership registration, etc. on May 11, 1977, but the Respondent was sentenced to the dismissal decision of the respondent on May 11, 197, but the Respondent appealed on Seoul High Court 77B or (Serial number omitted) but withdrawn the lawsuit against the applicant and the applicant for non-applicant, etc. on the ground that the Respondent did not appear on the date of pleading and did not dispute the applicant's assertion because he did not submit any other

In this regard, it is reasonable to view that the respondent has renounced his/her intention to preserve the above right to claim the transfer registration of ownership, which has been preserved by the provisional disposition decision of this case.

Therefore, the above reasons are changed in circumstances, so it is necessary to revoke the provisional disposition decision of this case. Accordingly, the applicant's application of this case is justified, and Article 89 of the Civil Procedure Act is applied to the provisional execution order of Article 199 of the same Act and Article 6 of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings with respect to the burden of litigation costs.

Judges Kim Shin (Presiding Judge)