Park Jae-hwan (Law Firm Han-gu, Attorney So-young et al., Counsel for the plaintiff-appellant)

Mangyeong-si et al.

7.24, 2003

Jeonju District Court Decision 200Kadan20764 Delivered on December 27, 2001

1. The judgment of the court below is revoked.

2. The plaintiff's claims against the defendants are all dismissed.

3. All costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the plaintiff through the first and second instances.

1. Purport of claim

The Defendants shall each implement the procedure for the registration of ownership transfer on the ground of the restoration of the true name with respect to each share of 631.5/1,326/1,326 of 96-2 forest land in Gyeyang-gu, Seoul Special Metropolitan City.

2. Purport of appeal

As set forth in the text.

1. Basic facts

In full view of each of the statements and arguments in Gap evidence 1-1-3, Gap evidence 2-3, Eul evidence 5-7, Eul evidence 1,2,5,11,12,15, Eul evidence 3-7, Eul evidence 1-2, Eul evidence 4-5, Eul evidence 8-1-3, Eul evidence 1-5, and Eul evidence 10-5, and all of the arguments, the following facts can be acknowledged, and there is no counter-proof otherwise:

A. On July 5, 1918, 1941, the forest land of this case is originally divided into one square meter (30 square meter) of the same mountain land (hereinafter “the forest land of this case”) and one square meter (hereinafter “the forest of this case”) of the same 96-2 forest land (hereinafter “the forest of this case”) of the same 96-1 forest land of the same 96-1 forest land and the 96-2 forest of the same 96-2 forest of this case, which was originally registered as one square meter (9 square meter) in Seo-gu, Seoul Special Metropolitan City. The forest of this case was registered as one square meter (9 square meter) in the forest register. Accordingly, the area of the forest of this case was registered as 99 square meters in the register.

B. On March 25, 1949, she died on and succeeded to the property by the family head, who is the family head’s heir, but died on November 11, 1958, and the Plaintiff, the family head’s heir. On March 6, 1991, the Plaintiff completed the registration of transfer of ownership for the above forest by inheritance on March 25, 1949.

C. However, in the forestry map, the said leisure mountain village was 96 square meters smaller than the registered area in the forestry map prior to the subdivision. However, the said forest was 5,792 square meters below the registered area in the forestry map. However, due to the error in the surveying in the course of the subdivision conducted on March 30, 1941, the said mountain village was 5,218 square meters where the area of the said mountain village was much less than the registered area in the forestry map. The forest was 574 square meters where the area of the said forest was much more than 30 square meters, the registered area of the said forest was 96-1 square meters, and the said mountain village was 96-1 square meters prior to the completion of the development of the said mountain village and was 133-1,5,901, and the said area was 1,6,000 won and the said forest was 20 square meters of the registered area in the forestry map to be 97 square meters of the registered area in the forestry map.

D. However, on May 8, 191, the forest of this case did not correct registered matters and completed the registration of transfer of ownership under the Plaintiff’s name on the ground of consultation on March 22 of the same year, but on June 30, 1994, the Plaintiff completed the registration of transfer of ownership on the ground of repurchase on May 20, 194.

E. Meanwhile, around April 1998, when the mutual savings and finance company established a mutual savings and finance company applied for compulsory auction of the forest of this case at Jeonju District Court 98,14639, the above court made a decision of compulsory commencement on the 18th of the same month and continued the procedure. According to the above court's order of real estate status survey and appraisal order, the execution officer submitted a report on the current status stating only the current status as "forest" without any special entry as to the area of the forest. The appraiser submitted a report on the current status as to the above forest, the area and the forest register measured by the forestry map, the area of the land on the register as well as the land register as requested by the auction court, which points out the difference in the area on the register, shall be 16,830,000 won per 170,000 won per 20,000 won per 99 x 170,000 won per 2,000 won, and the above auction court completed the sale of the forest of this case at 2.

F. Thereafter, on January 7, 200, the Defendants filed an application for correction of the registered matters with the area of 99 square meters in the forest of this case, which is the area of 1,226 square meters in the forest of this case, with the consent of the abandoned source as an interested party of the surrounding land, to the Seoul-gu Office in Seoul-si, Seoul-si, and with the area of 1,326 square meters in the forest of this case, the said area was corrected to 1,326 square meters in accordance with the contents of the application, and filed an application for correction of the area with the Jeonju District Court on March 15, 2000, the said area was corrected to 1,326 square meters in the register, and due to the correction of the said forest of this case, the said area was corrected to 27,920 square meters in the area of

2. Judgment on the plaintiff's assertion

The Plaintiff asserts that, notwithstanding the fact that the area of the forest of this case, which is the object of the said compulsory auction, is 1,326 square meters after the correction, which is the area in the current forestry map, the object of the said compulsory auction, the auction procedure is conducted on the basis of not less than 13 times the area is different, and only 9 square meters on the register and the area of 99 square meters on the register, which cannot be deemed as indicating the actual area of the said forest, and the subject of the said auction is the object of the said auction. As long as the said 9 square meters cannot be specified, it shall be deemed that only 9 square meters prior to the correction of the said forest, which is the object of the said 9 square meters, is the object of 9/1,326 square meters of the area after the correction, which is the actual area of the said forest, 9/1,326 square meters of the said forest, and therefore, the remaining 1,226

Therefore, the land of this case is specified as the lot number, land category, land category, and land register. According to the above facts, the forest of this case, which is the object of the above compulsory auction, is divided from the above 96 forest area into 30 square meters and registered as 99 square meters in the register, due to a mistake in surveying in the process of dividing neighboring land, the area at the time is 574 square meters due to a mistake in the cadastral map in the process of dividing the above 96-1 forest and the boundary confirmation process with neighboring land, while the error was not corrected again, the area of the forest of this case becomes 1,326 square meters in the current forestry map. Thus, at the time of the auction, the area of the forest of this case can not be specified as the area in the forestry map, which was prepared differently from the actual area of the land of this case due to the error in the surveying, and the area of the forest of this case is 99 square meters in the other cadastral record, which is the land register at the time of the auction, and the actual area of the above forest area was corrected by the defendants.

3. Conclusion

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim against the defendants of this case is dismissed as it is without merit, and the judgment of the court below is unfair, and it is so revoked, and all of the plaintiff's claim against the defendants is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition.

Judges Ocheon-cheon (Presiding Judge)