logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대법원 2012. 1. 12. 선고 2010두12354 판결
[토지대장정정불가처분취소][미간행]
Main Issues

Whether an administrative agency’s rejection of a request for change of land cadastre is an administrative disposition subject to appeal litigation (negative)

[Reference Provisions]

Article 2 (1) 1 of the Administrative Litigation Act

Reference Cases

[Plaintiff-Appellant] Plaintiff 1 and 1 other (Law Firm Gyeong, Attorneys Park Jae-soo et al., Counsel for plaintiff-appellant)

Plaintiff-Appellant

[Judgment of the court below]

Defendant-Appellee

The head of Sungnam-si Subdivision

Judgment of the lower court

Seoul High Court Decision 2009Nu39966 decided May 12, 2010

Text

The appeal is dismissed. The costs of appeal are assessed against the plaintiff.

Reasons

The grounds of appeal are examined.

An act of changing a specific matter indicated in the land cadastre is merely for the convenience of the execution of administrative affairs and the verification of facts, unless it relates to the matters that affect the substantive legal relationship of landowners, such as the change or correction of land category. Thus, even if the name of the owner is changed, it cannot bring about a change in the substantive legal relationship with respect to the relevant land, and the ownership of the land is not proved by only the entry in the cadastral record (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 82Nu308, Apr. 24, 1984; 2000Du7612, Apr. 26, 2002). Therefore, an act of refusing an application for change of the owner’s name on the land cadastre cannot be deemed an administrative disposition that becomes the object of appeal litigation.

In the same purport, the court below is just in holding that the plaintiff's lawsuit of this case seeking the revocation of the rejection of the request for change of the name of the owner of this case is unlawful, and there is no violation of law by misunderstanding the legal principles on administrative disposition, as otherwise alleged in the ground of appeal. Therefore, the appeal without examining

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed and the costs of appeal are assessed against the losing party. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.

Justices Yang Chang-soo (Presiding Justice)

arrow