진정명의회복을 위한 소유권이전등기청구의 소송물실체에 관한 연구 = A study on substantially objects of a lawsuit in registration demand for recovery of authentic name

진정명의 회복을 위한 소유권이전등기청구를 검토했다.

Once an invalid registration inconsistent with actual condition is made, then making the invalid registration valid by correcting it is by the means of cancellation of registration of that invalid one. But someone argues that demanding not the type of cancellation of registration, but transfer registration for recovery of authentic name based on the ownership. However, such a registration is unable to indicate the change process of the registration, so it may infringe on the interests of those having new interest from the reason invalid registration. The korea supreme court precedent in 2001.

overthrow the decision of 1990 by ruling that the registration cancellation demand for reason invalidation and the registration demand of ownership transfer for recovery of authentic name have substantially same objects of the lawsuit. which is contradictory to vested power. Hereby this article first explored arguments as to whether the registration demand of ownership transfer for recovery of authentic name is allowed or not , and then whether the registration demand of ownership transfer for recovery of authentic name would be allowed. if so, in what extent it is permitted.

Second, in case of contradiction to vested power, the registration demand of ownership transfer for recovery of authentic name should be denied. Since the registration cancellation demand for reason invalidation and the registration demand of ownership transfer for recovery of authentic name have different objects of a lawsuit, but they are in an opposite relation to the upheld legal relation at the previous lawsuit.

Ⅰ. 서설 Ⅱ. 위 소유권이전등기청구권의 인정여부 Ⅲ. 위 소유권이전등기청구소송에서 소송물의 실체