The right to the completion of the contract has been extinguished and has become void after the lapse of 10 years from the date of the reservation.

Since the right to the completion of a pre-sale agreement is terminated and lost its effect after the lapse of ten years from the date of the pre-sale agreement, Defendant SeoB has the obligation to cancel the above provisional registration to the Plaintiff, and the Defendant Republic of Korea, who completed the attachment registration based on the above provisional registration, as a third party with interest in the registration, has the obligation to express his/her consent to the cancellation

2012 Ghana 2175 Provisional Registration Cancellation of Claim for Ownership Transfer Registration

KimA

uBB et al.

March 12, 2013

March 26, 2013

1. Defendant SeoBB: Changwon on the Plaintiff’s 1,200 square meters prior to 205 Ori-ri Ori-ri 200 square meters in the area of Sincheon-gun, Chungcheongnam-gun.

The joint registry office of the district court and the registry office of November 18, 1985 will implement the procedure for the cancellation of the provisional registration of the right to claim ownership transfer, which was completed by the receipt No. 23990.

2. Defendant Republic of Korea shall declare to the Plaintiff the intention of acceptance regarding the registration of cancellation of the provisional right to claim transfer of ownership as described in paragraph (1).

3. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Defendants.

The same shall apply to the order.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On August 10, 201, the Plaintiff acquired ownership of the land indicated in Paragraph 1 of the Disposition (hereinafter “instant land”) due to the sale by voluntary auction on August 10, 201.

B. On the other hand, as of November 14, 1985, Defendant SeoB entered into a trade reservation with the literatureCC, which was the owner of the instant land as of November 14, 1985 (hereinafter “instant trade reservation”), and completed the provisional registration of the right to claim transfer of ownership as stated in Paragraph (1) of the order in the name of Defendant SeoB as of the said purchase reservation (hereinafter “the provisional registration of this case”).

C. The defendant Republic of Korea shall set the time limit for the pre-sale agreement with the defendant SeoB on April 18, 2008 with respect to the above pre-sale agreement with the above CC.

On April 24, 2008, the right to claim the transfer of ownership was seized, and on the instant land, the registration of the right to claim the transfer of ownership was completed.

[Ground of recognition] A without dispute, entry of evidence No. 1, purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. Determination on the cause of the claim

In the unilateral promise for sale, the right to complete the purchase and sale is a kind of right to create a pre-sale agreement with the other party to make the effect of the sale by expressing his/her intention of completion of the pre-sale agreement, i.e., the right to complete the pre-sale agreement, if there is no such an agreement between the parties, shall exercise it within 10 years from the date of establishment of the pre-sale agreement, and upon the expiration of such period, the right to complete the pre-sale agreement shall be extinguished due to the lapse of the exclusion period (see Supreme Court Decision 2000Da26425, Nov. 14, 1985). As regards the instant case, there is no evidence to acknowledge that the pre-sale agreement was concluded on November 14, 1985, and that the period of exercise of the right to complete the pre-sale agreement based on the pre-sale agreement has been set forth in the above provisional registration. As such, the right to complete the above provisional registration is obviously apparent from November 14, 1985.

B. Determination on Defendant Republic of Korea’s assertion

Defendant Republic of Korea asserts to the effect that the cancellation of the instant reservation should not prejudice the rights of the Defendant Republic of Korea, which is a third party. However, the instant reservation is not cancelled, but becomes void due to the extinction of the right to complete the purchase and sale, so the said assertion is without merit.

3. Conclusion

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim against the defendants shall be accepted in its entirety on the grounds of its reasoning, and it is so decided as per Disposition.