(a) Whether a title trustee of real estate can exercise the right to demand a third party to use and benefit from the real estate from the trust;

(b) Whether the other trustee who has acquired the shares of the entrusted property from one of the co-trustees can acquire the substantial shares in the relationship with the truster;

A. Since a title trustee of forest land cannot be deemed the actual owner of the forest land in relation to the relevant truster, it is not allowed to request a third party who has obtained the right to use and benefit from the truster, the actual owner of the forest land, to remove the owned property on the ground of the registered name

B. Unlike external sale and purchase between the trustee and a third party other than the trustee, the sale and purchase between the joint trustee is nothing more than acquiring the real ownership of the truster, but merely merely merely taking over the status of the trustee.

Articles 214 and 31 of the Civil Act

High Jins

Ison-gu

Jeonju District Court of the first instance (77 Gohap144)

The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

Expenses for appeal shall be borne by the plaintiff.

The judgment of the first instance shall be revoked.

The defendant, among the real estate in the attached list No. 1, shall be the plaintiff.

(1) The annex section 1 on the ground and the extract extract 8 square meters per share.

(2) 1 per unit 18 square meters per unit for assessment of earth, brick, bridges and booms on the ground in the display part of the drawing.

(3) 32 square meters per appraisal room of the earth, brick, boomed boomed boomed part of the drawing(s).

(4) The above section of the divist drawings and the coagum apap 34 square meters per share.

(5) 17 square meters per unit 5 square meters in storage for ground wooden sapap assessment on the part of the 5th drawing.

(6) The ginseng dry field of which the drawing is indicated, 4 weeks in 14 years old tree and 4 weeks in 14 years old tree in the ginseng field of 475.

(7) 30 shares per 956 square oak trees in the part indicated in the drawing.

(8) Part 792 of the Damsan tree 12-year 80 of the Damar map.

(9) Part D of the map 695 p.m. 14 p.m. 67 p.m. 14 p.m. 3 p.m.

(10) Two weeks in terms of the part indicated in the map M in terms of 914, six weeks in terms of 12-year pine trees, 5-year pine trees, 46 weeks in terms of 14-year pine trees, 17 weeks in terms of 4-year pine trees, 2 weeks in terms of 15-year pine trees, 16 weeks in terms of 18-year pine trees.

(11) To remove each 19 shares for the 14th and 58th and 19th five-years for the 14th and multiple tree in the part indicated in the 784 map, and to pay from February 26, 197 to the above delivery amounting to 300,000 won of the pension.

All the costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the defendant in the first and second instances.

Only the above removal and delivery parts may be provisionally executed.

1. On July 14, 1913 with respect to the forest land listed in the separate sheet Nos. 1, 2, and 3 (hereinafter referred to as the forest land in this case), the forest land was assessed in the future in the vicinity of the non-party 1, 2, and 3 on July 14, 1913. On August 20, 1924, the non-party 1924, the non-party 1, the father of the plaintiff who was his father, succeeded to it and completed the registration of preservation of ownership under the name of Dong on November 27, 1970. When the Dong died on April 21, 1973, the non-party 1, the father of the plaintiff, who was his father, succeeded to it, and the Dong died on April 21, 1973, it was jointly inherited by the plaintiff and the plaintiff, and on February 26, 197, the shares of the non-party 1, 7 et al. were registered under the name of the plaintiff.

2. The plaintiff's forest land is not only owned by the plaintiff, but it is difficult for the defendant to build and use the above house and sericultural room as stated in the plaintiff's claim. Since the plaintiff's 1, 300,00 won are planted and managed every year, it is argued that the above house, sericultural room and Japanese tree were removed and delivered at the same time, and the defendant's attorney sought the return of the above unjust enrichment at the same time (the defendant is owned by the non-party 1, 3, 4, 4, 5, 5, 5, 5, 5, 5, 4, 5, 5, 5, 5, 5, 5, 5, 5, 5, 5, 5, 5, 4, 5, 5, 5, 1, 5, 5, 5, 5, 5, 5, 1, 5, 5, 1, 5, 5, 1, 4, 5, 1, 5, 5, 1, 3, 5, 1, 1, 3, .

3. The plaintiff purchased each share of the forest of this case from other co-inheritors exhibited on February 24, 1977 and completed the registration of ownership transfer as of February 26, 197. Thus, although the plaintiff alleged that the forest of this case is owned by the plaintiff, it is true that the plaintiff purchased the shares of other co-inheritors, it is merely inheritance of the status of the trustee in relation to the same co-inheritors as well as the other co-inheritors. Thus, the sale of shares in the internal relationship of co-inheritors with the same trust is not merely a mere acquisition of the status of the trustee unless there are special circumstances, unlike external sale and purchase (see Article 31 of the Trust Act). Thus, the plaintiff's above assertion cannot be accepted (see Article 31 of the Trust Act).

4. Therefore, the plaintiff's claim of this case based on the premise that the forest land of this case is owned by the plaintiff shall be dismissed without any further review, and the judgment of the court of first instance with the same conclusion is just and without merit, and the plaintiff's appeal is dismissed, and the costs of the lawsuit shall be borne by the losing party and it is so decided as per Disposition (attached Form omitted).

Judges Lee Sung-sung(Presiding Judge)