1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance is as follows: (a) each of the “Act on the Registration of Real Estate under Actual Titleholder’s Name” under the former Act on the Registration of Real Estate under Actual Titleholder’s Name (amended by Act No. 13713, Jan. 6, 2016); and (b) the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance is identical to the ground of the judgment, except for adding the judgment on the Plaintiff’s argument in the trial under paragraph (2) below; (c) therefore, it shall be cited in accordance with Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act, the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

According to Article 2(1)1 of the Act on Special Measures for the Registration of Real Estate for the Registration of Real Estate for the plaintiff's argument in the trial of the trial, the purchaser of real estate shall file an application for the registration of ownership transfer within 60 days from the date the performance of opposite payment is completed. The "date the performance of opposite payment is completed" is reasonable to deem that the purchaser can apply for the registration of ownership transfer at any time after being provided with documents necessary for the registration of ownership transfer from the seller. Since the plaintiff failed to obtain documents necessary for the registration of ownership transfer from other inheritors B or B, there is no "the

Therefore, the plaintiff does not constitute a person subject to Article 2 (1) of the Act on Special Measures for the Registration of Real Estate.

In addition, according to Article 10(1) main text and Article 10(1)1 of the Real Estate Real Name Act, a penalty surcharge shall be imposed on a person entitled to registration who fails to apply for the registration of ownership transfer within three years from the “the date the performance of opposite benefit is actually completed”. For the foregoing reason, there is no “the date the performance of opposite benefit is actually completed” under Article 10(1)1 of the Real Estate Real Name Act, and the defendant does not specify the relevant date.

Therefore, the main text of Article 10(1) of the Real Estate Real Name Act cannot be applied to the plaintiff.

(e).