Where claims secured by provisional registration are seized, the entry in the register of such seizure;

Even in cases where a seizure order is issued on a claim secured by a provisional registration, and a request for a seizure order is made to enter such seizure in the register, there is no fundamental institutional device to register the provisional registration security right in accordance with the current Registration of Real Estate Act as an independent real estate property right, and in the case of a security for provisional registration, the disclosure of the secured claim is very insufficient unlike the mortgage. Thus, Article 562 of the Civil Procedure Act on the seizure of mortgage-backed claims cannot be applied mutatis mutandis to the above request for registration. Accordingly, it should be dismissed by applying mutatis mutandis Article 52 of the Registration of Real Estate Act on the seizure of mortgage-backed claims.

Article 562 of the Civil Procedure Act, Article 55 of the Registration of Real Estate Act

【Court Decision 78Ma282 decided Oct. 14, 1978 (Article 2(1)27 of the Registration of Real Estate Act; Article 2(1)27 of the Registration of Real Estate Act; Article 113No153Gong601 decided Oct. 1525)

Dogs;

Seoul District Court Branch Branch of the Seoul District Court (85m5803, Ruling)

The appeal is dismissed.

The gist of the reason for appeal by the appellant is that he sells the real estate indicated in the separate list on February 2, 1985 to the non-appealed party, and on February 21 of the same month, he transferred the title of ownership to the above sub-wing party without being paid the remaining amount of 277,200,000 won out of the purchase price of the above real estate, to secure the above purchase price claim, the court's rejection of the provisional registration of the above red e-mail's right to claim transfer of ownership based on the promise to purchase and sell the same day under No. 19179, which is the same day's 19179, which is the same as the above red e-mail's 829, which is the provisional registration of this case. On the other hand, the appellant's rejection of the above provisional registration of this case's claim for seizure against the above Hong e-mail's 829,200,000 won, which is the above provisional registration of this case's claim.

Therefore, in a case where a provisional registration has been made on a certain real estate to secure a certain claim as alleged by the appellant, and a seizure order is issued on a "claim secured by a provisional registration" as to whether such seizure is possible on the registry, the provisional registration on January 1, 1984 is enacted and implemented Act on Provisional Registration Security. According to the above law, a provisional registration on a security right is granted to a person holding a provisional registration on a security right and a right to preferential payment on a real estate. It can be understood as a new right similar to a security right on a legal real estate. Meanwhile, Article 2 of the Registration of Real Estate Act provides that the ownership, superficies, servitude, easement, right to lease on a deposit basis, pledge and right to lease on a real estate shall be established, preserved, altered, or extinguished, unless there are any special grounds for seizure, and the above provisional registration cannot be deemed as being registered once an agreement on a security right and a right to provisional registration is established under the current Civil Procedure Act, which is not sufficient for the parties to the provisional registration to make an agreement on a security right to the real estate.

Therefore, the registration request of seizure of this case constitutes "when the registration request is not made" under Article 55 subparagraph 2 of the Registration of Real Estate Act, so the above decision of the public official of the registration and the original decision dismissing the objection, which dismissed the above decision, are just and without merit, and the appeal by the appellant is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition.

Judges Kim Jong-py (Presiding Judge)