logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대법원 1990. 11. 13. 선고 90다카23066 판결
[토지소유권이전등기말소][공1991.1.1.(887),85]
Main Issues

Where part of the forest land within one parcel has been sold and the ownership transfer registration for all the forest land has been completed on the basis that the forest land was not divided on the register, and thereafter the buyer has completed the ownership transfer registration for the entire forest area under a third party’s name, whether the seller loses the ownership for the portion which has not been sold (affirmative)

Summary of Judgment

In the event that the registration of ownership transfer has been made from the seller on the whole land part of the forest land within one parcel of land without dividing it into the registry, the title trust relationship was established among the above two persons, unless there are special circumstances. A third party, who has received the registration of ownership transfer from the buyer who is the title trustee, shall also acquire the ownership of the part which was not first sold, unless there are special circumstances. Thus, the third party purchaser shall lose the ownership of the part of the land at the same time as the above ownership of the third party purchaser did not sell at the same time.

[Reference Provisions]

Article 186 of the Civil Act / [title trust]

Reference Cases

[Plaintiff-Appellant-Appellee] Plaintiff 1 and 1 other (Law Firm Han, Attorneys Park Jae-young and 2 others, Counsel for plaintiff-appellant-appellant-appellee)

Plaintiff, Appellant

[Defendant-Appellee] Kim Tae-tae, Counsel for defendant-appellee

Defendant, Appellee

[Defendant-Appellant] Defendant 1 and 2 others, Counsel for defendant-appellant-appellant

Judgment of the lower court

Gwangju District Court Decision 89Na5597 delivered on June 1, 1990

Text

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the plaintiff.

Reasons

We examine the grounds of appeal.

On September 15, 1976, the court below held that the number of non-party 4, who is his father, was no longer a new owner of the above-mentioned land, and that the ownership transfer registration for the above-mentioned land was made to the new owner of the above-mentioned land on the ground that the new owner was no more than 30 square meters of the new land and the ownership transfer registration for the new owner of the above-mentioned land was made on August 16, 197, and that the ownership transfer registration for the new owner of the above-mentioned land was made on July 28, 1982, and that the new owner of the above-mentioned land was no more than 4,000 no more than 30 square meters of the new owner's ownership transfer registration for the new owner of the above-mentioned land on the ground that the new owner of the above-mentioned land was no more than 4,000 square meters of the new owner's ownership transfer registration for the new owner of the above-mentioned land on the ground that the new owner's ownership was no more than 4,

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 on the bench.

Justices Lee Jong-soo (Presiding Justice) Lee Chang-soo Kim Jong-won

arrow