1. The request is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. The Plaintiff is the owner of land in Gyeyang-gu, Gyeyang-gu (hereinafter “instant land”).

As to the instant land, the Defendant was subject to a provisional disposition against the prohibition on disposal of real estate in order to obtain the right to preserve the “right to claim the registration of ownership transfer of the instant land by subrogation of non-applicant D,” and on June 4, 2013, the registration of the provisional disposition was recorded in the registry of the instant land.

The Defendant filed a lawsuit against the Plaintiff and the Plaintiff’s wife E by filing a claim for ownership transfer registration with respect to the instant land by filing a lawsuit for ownership transfer registration with the High Government District Court 2014Gahap50654, and lost the lawsuit. Although the Defendant appealed, the Defendant’s appeal was dismissed, and the judgment became final and conclusive on December 22, 2016.

According to the decision of revocation of provisional disposition 2017Kahap6's High District Court's High Court's High Court's High Court's High Court's High Court's High Court's High Court's High Court's High Court's High Court's High Court's High Court's High Court's High Court's 2013Kahap177

[Ground for Recognition: Facts without dispute, entries in Gap evidence 1 through 4, purport of the whole pleadings]

2. Assertion and determination

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion was, without a legitimate title, unable to exercise all the property rights, such as selling the instant land or receiving a loan, from June 4, 2013 to December 22, 2016, on the wind of maintaining the provisional disposition registration from June 4, 2013 to the date when the judgment on the merits became final and conclusive.

Therefore, as damages to the Plaintiff, the Defendant shall compensate the Plaintiff for KRW 47,651,425 calculated by applying the statutory interest of KRW 90 million and the deposit interest rate equivalent to the interest rate at the time of the decision of provisional disposition.

B. According to the reasoning of the judgment evidence No. 2, the Plaintiff’s type F managed the Defendant’s decedent G’s property, and concluded a sales contract with the purchase of the instant land delegated by G. However, F is the name of the purchaser.