In a case where, after a civil judgment ordering the cancellation of the ownership transfer registration for the cause of the cancellation of the non-disposition, the administrative judgment ordering the cancellation of the above non-disposition becomes final and conclusive (when the administrative disposition based on the final and conclusive judgment is changed by another judgment), whether the claim for ownership transfer registration for the cause of the above non-disposition conflicts with the res judicata of the above civil final and conclusive judgment (affirmative

If the property belonging to the Director-General (real estate) is sold to the non-party company and the disposition of the above sale was revoked after the transfer registration was made, the lawsuit filed by the government against the non-party company for the cancellation of the above disposition of the transfer registration becomes final and conclusive in favor of the State, and if the non-party company's revocation of the disposition of the above sale in the administrative litigation instituted by the non-party company becomes final and conclusive, the non-party company is thereby going against the res judicata effect of the civil final and conclusive judgment in the above lawsuit.

Articles 202 and 422(1)8 of the Civil Procedure Act

Supreme Court Decision 79Da292 delivered on April 24, 1979, 79Da420 delivered on May 15, 1979, 78Da2287,2288 delivered on March 27, 1979

[Defendant-Appellee] Plaintiff 1

Korea

Seoul High Court Decision 79Na3761 delivered on March 21, 1980

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal shall be borne by the plaintiff.

The grounds of appeal Nos. 1 and 2 of the Plaintiff’s attorney are examined together (to the extent of supplement in case of supplemental grounds of appeal after the expiration of the submission period).

According to the facts established by the court below, the Director-General of Chungcheongnam-gu, the defendant, sold the land of this case, which is the property devolving upon the defendant, to the non-party 1, 2545, and the above company sold it to the non-party 2,7.4 of this year to the non-party 29, and completed the procedure for ownership transfer registration of this case, and the above sale of this case to the non-party 29,99. The above Director-General of Chungcheongnam-gu, the defendant revoked the above sale of this case's land with the above 1, 250, 97, 97, 97, 97, 97, 97, 97, 97, 97, 97, 97, 97, 97, 97, 97, 97, 97, 97, 97, 97, 97, 97, 97, 960, 97, 97, 9, 97, 9.2, 97.2.

The decision of 78Da2287,2288 delivered on March 27, 1979 shall be amended. The decision of 63Da359 delivered on September 12, 1963 by the party members pointing out the theory of lawsuit is different from this case. The above decision of 80Da738,739 delivered on February 10, 1981 is a decision of 78Da2287,2288 delivered on March 27, 1979 and the court remanded the case from the court of final appeal based on the reasoning of reversal of the above decision of 78Da2287,2288 delivered on March 27, 197, which is bound by the court of final appeal, and the court of final appeal shall not be bound by the factual and legal judgment of 73Da220 delivered on October 23, 197, and shall not be able to take the opinion in the same case (see each of the above decision).

Therefore, the court below's decision to the purport as stated in the above is just, and there is no error of law by misunderstanding the legal principles as to the res judicata effect of judgment and the retrial system, such as the theory of lawsuit, so all arguments cannot be employed.

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed, and the costs of the appeal are assessed against the losing party. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.

Justices Park So-young (Presiding Justice) Lee So-young (Presiding Justice) Lee So-young, Kim So-young, Lee So-young, Lee So-young, Kim So-young, Lee So-young