[1] Requirements for a part of the building to become the object of sectional ownership

[2] Whether a successful bidder acquires ownership in a case where part of a building that does not meet physical requirements that are the object of sectional ownership is awarded a successful bidder (negative)

[3] The case holding that registration of preservation of ownership of the above store is null and void because the store is not separated from other parts due to its structural structure or actual use

[1] If a part of one building is to be the object of sectional ownership, the part must be separated from other parts in structure or use due to its degree of accuracy, and there may be differences in the strictness of structural independence in accordance with the situation of use or use. However, the independence of structure is required because it is necessary to clarify the scope of physical control over the object which mainly becomes the object of ownership. Thus, if the scope of the object of sectional ownership cannot be determined by structural division, structural independence cannot be said to exist.

[2] A part of a building which fails to meet the physical requirements appropriate as an object of sectional ownership cannot be established as sectional ownership. Thus, even if it is registered as an independent sectional building on the building management ledger and is registered as an independent sectional ownership on the register, and an auction procedure is conducted based on such registration and is awarded a successful bid, the registration is in itself null and void, and thus the successful bidder cannot acquire the ownership.

[3] The case holding that registration of preservation of ownership of the above store is null and void because the store is not separated from other parts due to its structural structure or actual use

[1] Article 215 of the Civil Code, Article 1 of the Multi-Unit Residential Building Act / [2] Article 215 of the Civil Code, Article 1 of the Multi-Unit Residential Building Act / [3] Article 215 of the Civil Code, Article

[1] Supreme Court Decision 92Da41214 delivered on March 9, 1993 (Gong1993Sang, 1151), Supreme Court Decision 94Da40239 delivered on June 9, 1995 (Gong1995Ha, 2376), Supreme Court Decision 94Da53587, 53594 delivered on September 29, 1995 (Gong1995Ha, 3602) / [2] Supreme Court Decision 92Da3151, 1390, 4406 delivered on April 24, 1992 (Gong192, 1685)

Plaintiff

Jin Chang District Sales Co., Ltd.

Seoul District Court Decision 99Na22556 delivered on July 2, 1999

The appeal is dismissed. The costs of appeal are assessed against the plaintiff.

We examine the grounds of appeal.

If a part of one building is able to become the object of sectional ownership, its part must be separated from other parts in structure or use. The severity of structural judgment may vary depending on the situation of use or use. However, structural independence is required because the scope of physical control over the object of ownership is mainly necessary to clarify the scope of physical control. Thus, if the scope of the object of sectional ownership cannot be determined by structural division, it cannot be said that the structural independence exists (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 92Da41214, Mar. 9, 193). A part of the building that failed to meet physical requirements, which is the object of sectional ownership, cannot be established. Thus, the sectional ownership of the building is a separate partitioned building on the building management ledger, and it is registered as the object of sectional ownership on the register, and even if it has been awarded a successful bid based on such registration, the successful bidder is not entitled to acquire ownership. Thus, even if it is in itself invalid (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 92Da41214, Apr. 1, 1992).

According to the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance as cited by the plaintiff, the non-party 1 corporation and the non-party 1 corporation were divided into the above 7 non-party 1 corporation and the non-party 1 corporation's non-party 1 corporation and the non-party 7 corporation's non-party 1 corporation's non-party 1 corporation's non-party 1 corporation and the non-party 1 corporation's non-party 7 corporation's non-party 9 corporation's non-party 1 corporation's non-party 9 corporation's non-party 1 corporation's non-party 9 corporation's non-party 1 corporation's non-party 1 corporation's non-party 7 corporation's non-party 9 corporation's non-party 1 corporation's non-party 9 corporation's non-party 1 corporation's non-party 1 corporation's non-party 1 corporation's non-party 9 corporation's non-party 1 corporation's non-party 1 corporation's non-6 corporation's non-party 1

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 Shin Sung-sung (Presiding Justice)