Abstract
According to the Supreme Court of Korea, the owner who disposed of the real estate whose period of real estate ownership through possession has been completed is not liable for default to the occupant. However, claim for the Substitute is recognized. However, this is only the case when the occupant requests the transfer of ownership registration or claims that the prescription for acquisition of possession has been completed. If the owner knew or could have known such a fact and disposed of it, liability for tort is recognized.
 In this article, these Supreme Court precedents and theories about them were reviewed. The conclusion is as follows:
 A person who has completed the prescription for acquisition of possession does not have the right to claim ownership transfer registration as a creditor. The owner must only cooperate with the person who has completed the prescription for possession acquisition to acquire ownership through registration. Therefore, the owner has no liability to the occupant. If the owner disposes of the real estate, the legal relationship ends. It does not convert into damages for failure or claim for the Substitute.
 However, If the owner disposes of the real estate to prevent the occupant from registering and taking ownership, liability for tort is established.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
