Where a judgment of ordering cancellation on the ground that the registration of ownership transfer or the registration of establishment of a neighboring mortgage is null and void, the status of a person who acquired ownership after the closing of argument in the judgment.

If a judgment of ordering the cancellation of registration of ownership transfer and the registration of the establishment of a neighboring mortgage becomes final and conclusive on the grounds that the initial reason is null and void, res judicata effect shall extend to the acquisitor of ownership due to the voluntary auction execution, who is the successor after the closing of argument of the judgment, regardless of the procedure preventing the progress of the auction procedure,

Article 204(1) of the Civil Procedure Act

[Judgment of the court below] The Head of Simk-gu Office Department Department of Goyang-Jak-Jak, Inc., Counsel for the plaintiff-appellant

Defendant

Gwangju High Court Decision 73Na429 delivered on May 17, 1974

The original judgment is reversed, and the case is remanded to the Gwangju High Court.

The part on the second ground of appeal by the plaintiff's attorney and the original judgment are determined ex officio.

The court below held that the plaintiff's assertion that the registration of cancellation of the registration of the establishment of a mortgage against the above non-party 4 was null and void, on the ground that the registration of the establishment of a mortgage against the non-party 1 and the non-party 2 was completed on May 25, 1970, and again, the registration of the establishment of a mortgage against the non-party 4 was completed on the non-party 2 and the non-party 3's name on the non-party 4 on the non-party 4 on the non-party 4 on the non-party 4 on the non-party 3's name on the non-party 4 on the non-party 4 on the non-party 1 and the non-party 4 on the non-party 4 on the non-party 4 on the non-party 4 on the non-party 1, 1972 on the non-party 4 on the non-party 4 on the non-party 1, on the non-party 4 on the non-party 3's title.

According to Gap evidence No. 1, which is not a dispute over the establishment of the plaintiff, the plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the above non-party 3 and the non-party 4 seeking the cancellation of the above registration of ownership transfer and the registration of the establishment of a neighboring mortgage, and the judgment was rendered to order the cancellation of each registration on the ground that each registration is null and void from the original date. If the judgment becomes final and conclusive, the res judicata effect shall extend to the purchaser of ownership due to the voluntary auction after the closing of pleadings, regardless of whether the court below took a procedure to prevent the progress of the auction procedure or a measure on the register as stated in the court below's reasoning, as stated in the judgment below, although the court below should have deliberated upon whether the above judgment became final and conclusive, and whether the defendant's payment of the successful bid was made after the closing of arguments, the court below's judgment not taking such measures should not be deemed to have committed an unlawful

Therefore, since the original judgment shall not be exempted from reversal on this point first, the original judgment shall be reversed, and the case shall be remanded to the Gwangju High Court which is the original judgment. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.

Justices Seo-gu et al. (Presiding Justice)