1. As to real estate listed in the separate sheet:

A. Defendant B shall register the Daejeon District Court with Defendant C and April 15, 2005.

Basic Facts

The plaintiff and defendant B are private villages.

On April 15, 2005, the registration of transfer of ownership was completed to Defendant B on April 2, 2005 with respect to the Daejeon PY-gu 298 square meters and E 2,947 square meters (hereinafter “each of the instant lands”) as indicated in the attached list owned by Defendant C (hereinafter “each of the instant lands”).

【In the absence of dispute, the Plaintiff’s actual purchaser of each of the lands of this case is the Plaintiff, and at the time of the sales contract, the seller was the seller, the Plaintiff, and Defendant B entrusted only the name of the purchaser of each of the lands of this case to Defendant B, who was the seller at the time of the sales contract.

The registration of transfer of ownership in the name of Defendant B, which was completed on each of the instant land in accordance with the above title trust agreement, is null and void pursuant to the main sentence of Article 4(2) of the Act on the Registration of Real Estate under Actual Titleholder’s Name (hereinafter “Real Estate Real Name Act”). The Plaintiff seeks to implement the procedure for the registration of cancellation of each transfer of ownership in the name of Defendant B, which was completed on each of the instant land in subrogation of

The distinction between whether a title trust agreement is a three-party registered title trust or a contract title trust agreement is a matter of determining who the contracting party is, and the contracting party is the title trustee.

Even if a contracting party can be seen as a title truster, it will be a three-party registered title trust.

Therefore, if it is recognized that a contract is concluded with the intention of directly reverting the legal effect of the contract to the title truster rather than the title trustee, the title truster is the contracting party. Therefore, the title trust relationship in this case should be deemed as a three-party registered title trust.

Supreme Court Decision 2010Da5279 Decided October 28, 2010