beta
Text
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Reasons
1. Facts of recognition;
A. On October 28, 1997, the Plaintiff purchased 130,000,000 square meters of 516 m2 and 1,863 m2 (hereinafter referred to as “instant land” together with the said land, by way of trusting the name to the Defendant, who is the Republic of Korea on October 28, 1997. Pursuant to the above title trust agreement, the Defendant completed the registration of ownership transfer on November 3, 1997 with the land of 1,863 m2 (1,863 m2) prior to the Gyeongbuk-gun, Gandong-gun, the 516 m2 of C forest and 516 m2 on December 3, 197.
B. On July 2, 1999, the Defendant sold the instant land in KRW 140,000,000 to E, and completed the registration of ownership transfer on August 4, 199.
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, Gap evidence Nos. 4 and 5-1, 2, the purport of the whole pleadings
2. According to Article 4(1) and (2) of the Act on the Registration of Real Estate under Actual Titleholder’s Name, when a title truster and a title trustee entered into a contract on real estate under a so-called contract title trust agreement with the owner who did not know that the title trustee was a party to the contract and completed the registration of ownership transfer of the pertinent real estate in accordance with the said contract, the title trustee would acquire full ownership of the pertinent real estate, notwithstanding the invalidity of the title trust agreement between the title truster and the title trustee, and the title trustee would be liable to return unjust enrichment to the title truster. If the contract title trust agreement was concluded after the enforcement of the Real Estate Real Name Act, the title truster could not acquire ownership of the pertinent real estate from the beginning, and thus, the damage suffered by the title truster due to the invalidity of the said title trust agreement would be deemed as the purchase fund provided to the title trustee, not the pertinent real estate itself, but the purchase fund provided
Any judgment on January 28, 2005