Open Decision Ledger · Civil procedure & enforcement
Res judicata of a pre-suit mediation against a restoration-of-title claim
Supreme Court, Dec. 6, 2002, 2002Da44014 (judgment)
Case name: 소유권이전등기등
Official text on the National Law Information Center
Question
Does the res judicata of a pre-suit mediation reaching a land transfer registration extend to a later claim that asks, in place of cancellation of that registration, for a transfer registration based on restoration of the true registered title, and may the mediation record be asserted to be void because its content violates mandatory rules?
Holding
It does. A pre-suit mediation record has the same effect as a final judgment and creates res judicata between the parties, and a claim for transfer registration in place of cancellation of the registration made under that mediation is substantially the same in subject matter as the cancellation claim, since both seek to restore the true owner's registered title and both are claims to exclude interference with ownership; the mediation's res judicata therefore reaches the later claim as well, unless the mediation has been cancelled by quasi-retrial. A pre-suit mediation record also has the same effect as a final judgment, so even where its content violates mandatory rules, that is only a defect in the settlement, which may be remedied by quasi-retrial, and the record cannot be asserted to be void unless it carries a ground on which a final judgment is automatically void.
Summary of the holding, verbatim
제소전 화해에 기하여 경료된 소유권이전등기의 말소등기청구에 갈음한 진정명의회복을 원인으로 한 소유권이전등기청구가 실질적으로는 말소등기청구와 소송물이 동일하다는 이유로 제소전 화해의 기판력에 저촉되어 허용되지 않는다고 한 사례
Unofficial English translation
A case in which it was held that a claim for transfer of registration of ownership on the ground of restoration of the true name in the register, brought in lieu of a claim for cancellation of registration of a transfer of registration of ownership entered on the basis of conciliation effected before filing suit, has the same subject matter of suit as a claim for cancellation of registration in substance, and is therefore obstructed by the res judicata of the conciliation effected before filing suit and is not permitted
Disposition
Dismissed Stated in the decision
상고를 기각한다. 상고비용은 원고의 부담으로 한다.
Unofficial English translation
The appeal is dismissed. The costs of the final appeal are borne by the plaintiff.
Form of the test
Elements stated Stated in the decision
전, 후 양소의 소송물이 동일하지 않다고 하더라도, 후소의 소송물이 전소에서 확정된 법률관계와 모순되는 정반대의 사항을 소송물로 삼았다면 이러한 경우에는 전소 판결의 기판력이 후소에 미친다.
Unofficial English translation
Even where the subject matter of suit of the earlier and the later suits is not identical, if the subject matter of suit of the later suit is a matter directly contrary to and inconsistent with the legal relationship determined in the earlier suit, in such a case the res judicata of the judgment in the earlier suit extends to the later suit.
Factors
- 제소전 화해조서는 확정판결과 같은 효력이 있어 당사자 사이에 기판력이 생기는 것이므로
- 제소전 화해가 준재심에 의하여 취소되지 않은 이상
- 말소등기에 갈음하여 허용되는 진정명의회복을 원인으로 한 소유권이전등기청구권과 무효등기의 말소등기청구권은 어느 것이나 진정한 소유자의 등기명의를 회복하기 위한 것으로서 실질적으로 그 목적이 동일하고
- 두 청구권 모두 소유권에 기한 방해배제청구권으로서 그 법적 근거와 성질이 동일하므로
- 거기에 확정판결의 당연무효 사유와 같은 사유가 없는 한 설령 그 내용이 강행법규에 위반된다 할지라도
Unofficial English translation
• as the conciliation record prepared before filing suit has the same effect as a final and conclusive judgment, and thus res judicata arises between the parties,
• so long as the conciliation effected before filing suit has not been revoked by way of quasi-retrial,
• the claim for transfer of registration of ownership on the ground of restoration of the true name in the register, which is permitted in lieu of a claim for cancellation of registration, and the claim for cancellation of registration of a void registration are, in either case, intended to restore the name in the register of the true owner, and their purpose is identical in substance, and
• as both claims are claims for the removal of impediments based on ownership, and their legal basis and nature are identical,
• unless there exists a ground rendering it void by operation of law the same as a ground for nullity of a final and conclusive judgment, even if its content violates mandatory provisions of law,
Relation to precedent
Follows earlier decisions Stated in the decision
대법원 2001. 9. 20. 선고 99다37894 전원합의체 판결(공2001하, 2251)
Unofficial English translation
Supreme Court en banc Decision 99Da37894 decided September 20, 2001 (Gong 2001 Ha, 2251)
Decisions referred to
[1] 대법원 1995. 3. 24. 선고 93다52488 판결(공1995상, 1712) / [3] 대법원 2001. 9. 20. 선고 99다37894 전원합의체 판결(공2001하, 2251) / [5] 대법원 1975. 11. 11. 선고 74다634 판결(공1976, 8763), 대법원 1987. 10. 13. 선고 86다카2275 판결(공1987, 1700), 대법원 2000. 3. 10. 선고 99다67703 판결(공2000상, 951)
Burden of proof
Not addressed Not in the decision
Open question and revisit condition
What circumstances constitute a ground on which a pre-suit mediation record is automatically void in the same way as a final judgment?
A decision from quasi-retrial cancelling the mediation between these parties would remove the premise that the res judicata stands, and this entry would have to be read again. A later decision listing grounds of automatic invalidity for a pre-suit mediation record, or an amendment to Article 216 of the Civil Procedure Act, would likewise require a fresh reading.
Cross-family AI independent reading & axis check
8 of 8 axes matched GPT-6 Astra (OpenAI, codex CLI) · 2026-10-24
A reader from another model family (GPT-6 Astra), given the official text but not the primary reading, agreed on all 8 axes.
Raw responses and comparison record: Protocol · Blind readings (JSONL) · Axis comparison (JSONL) · SHA-256 (JSON)
Lower-court contrast & scope of application
Lower-court reading vs. Supreme Court holding
Lower-court context: The Changwon District Court, in its judgment of 27 June 2002 (2000Na4771), held on the same lines that the plaintiff's alternative claims, seeking either performance of a transfer registration based on restoration of the true registered title or cancellation of the registration made under the pre-suit mediation, were barred, because the pre-suit mediation had not been cancelled by quasi-retrial and so disputing the effect of the registration made under it contradicted the res judicata of that mediation.
Supreme Court standard: The Supreme Court found no error. It held that the res judicata of a pre-suit mediation reaches not only a cancellation claim but also a transfer claim brought in its place on the ground of restoration of the true registered title, since the two are the same in subject matter in substance, and that the argument that the mediation was a void antisocial act brought about by a breach of trust by the representative of the plaintiff's clan association joined in actively by the representative of the defendant's clan association could not be accepted. It dismissed the appeal and placed the costs on the plaintiff.
Distinguishing conditions
- A case in which the pre-suit mediation has been cancelled by quasi-retrial, since the holding is conditioned on the mediation not having been so cancelled.
- A mediation record carrying a ground on which a final judgment is automatically void, since only then can the record be asserted to be void rather than merely defective.
- A later claim whose subject matter does not contradict the legal relationship fixed in the earlier proceeding, such as a transfer claim on restoration of title that does not stand in place of a cancellation claim.
Record verification notes
Set the pre-suit mediation record beside the pleadings in the later action and check that the plaintiff's claim really is a cancellation claim recast as a transfer claim, because the Court's reasoning rests on that substantial identity. Then look for any quasi-retrial decision cancelling the mediation, since without it the res judicata stands. Finally, keep the mandatory-rule argument apart from automatic invalidity: a violation of mandatory rules alone leaves the record effective between the parties.
From the official text
Points at issue
[1] 소송물이 동일하지 않더라도 후소의 소송물이 전소에서 확정된 법률관계와 모순되는 정반대의 사항인 경우에는 전소 판결의 기판력이 후소에 미치는지 여부(적극) [2] 제소전 화해에 기하여 마쳐진 소유권이전등기가 원인무효라고 주장하며 말소등기절차의 이행을 청구하는 것이 기판력에 저촉되는지 여부(적극) [3] 무효등기의 말소등기청구권과 그에 갈음하여 허용되는 진정명의회복을 원인으로 한 소유권이전등기청구권은 동일한 소송물인지 여부(적극) [4] 제소전 화해에 기하여 경료된 소유권이전등기의 말소등기청구에 갈음한 진정명의회복을 원인으로 한 소유권이전등기청구가 실질적으로는 말소등기청구와 소송물이 동일하다는 이유로 제소전 화해의 기판력에 저촉되어 허용되지 않는다고 한 사례 [5] 강행법규에 위반된 화해조서의 효력
Unofficial English translation
[1] Whether the res judicata of a judgment in an earlier suit extends to a later suit even where the subject matter of suit is not identical, if the subject matter of suit of the later suit is a matter directly contrary to and inconsistent with the legal relationship determined in the earlier suit (affirmative) [2] Whether a claim for the performance of procedures for cancellation of registration, asserting that a transfer of registration of ownership completed on the basis of conciliation effected before filing suit is void as to its ground, is obstructed by res judicata (affirmative) [3] Whether the claim for cancellation of registration of a void registration and the claim for transfer of registration of ownership on the ground of restoration of the true name in the register, which is permitted in lieu thereof, constitute the same subject matter of suit (affirmative) [4] A case in which it was held that a claim for transfer of registration of ownership on the ground of restoration of the true name in the register, brought in lieu of a claim for cancellation of registration of a transfer of registration of ownership entered on the basis of conciliation effected before filing suit, has the same subject matter of suit as a claim for cancellation of registration in substance, and is therefore obstructed by the res judicata of the conciliation effected before filing suit and is not permitted [5] The effect of a conciliation record that violates mandatory provisions of law
Summary of the holding
[1] 전, 후 양소의 소송물이 동일하지 않다고 하더라도, 후소의 소송물이 전소에서 확정된 법률관계와 모순되는 정반대의 사항을 소송물로 삼았다면 이러한 경우에는 전소 판결의 기판력이 후소에 미친다. [2] 제소전 화해조서는 확정판결과 같은 효력이 있어 당사자 사이에 기판력이 생기는 것이므로, 원고가 피고에게 토지에 관하여 신탁해지를 원인으로 한 소유권이전등기절차를 이행하기로 한 제소전 화해가 준재심에 의하여 취소되지 않은 이상, 그 제소전 화해에 기하여 마쳐진 소유권이전등기가 원인무효라고 주장하며 말소등기절차의 이행을 청구하는 것은 제소전 화해에 의하여 확정된 소유권이전등기청구권을 부인하는 것이어서 그 기판력에 저촉된다. [3] 진정한 등기명의의 회복을 위한 소유권이전등기청구는 이미 자기 앞으로 소유권을 표상하는 등기가 되어 있었거나 법률에 의하여 소유권을 취득한 자가 진정한 등기명의를 회복하기 위한 방법으로 현재의 등기명의인을 상대로 그 등기의 말소를 구하는 것에 갈음하여 허용되는 것인데, 말소등기에 갈음하여 허용되는 진정명의회복을 원인으로 한 소유권이전등기청구권과 무효등기의 말소등기청구권은 어느 것이나 진정한 소유자의 등기명의를 회복하기 위한 것으로서 실질적으로 그 목적이 동일하고, 두 청구권 모두 소유권에 기한 방해배제청구권으로서 그 법적 근거와 성질이 동일하므로, 비록 전자는 이전등기, 후자는 말소등기의 형식을 취하고 있다고 하더라도 그 소송물은 실질상 동일한 것으로 보아야 한다. [4] 제소전 화해에 기하여 경료된 소유권이전등기의 말소등기청구에 갈음한 진정명의회복을 원인으로 한 소유권이전등기청구가 실질적으로는 말소등기청구와 소송물이 동일하다는 이유로 제소전 화해의 기판력에 저촉되어 허용되지 않는다고 한 사례. [5] 제소전 화해조서는 확정판결과 동일한 효력이 있어 당사자 사이에 기판력이 생기는 것이므로, 거기에 확정판결의 당연무효 사유와 같은 사유가 없는 한 설령 그 내용이 강행법규에 위반된다 할지라도 그것은 단지 제소전 화해에 하자가 있음에 지나지 아니하여 준재심절차에 의하여 구제받는 것은 별문제로 하고 그 화해조서를 무효라고 주장할 수는 없다.
Order
상고를 기각한다. 상고비용은 원고의 부담으로 한다.
Unofficial English translation
The appeal is dismissed. The costs of the final appeal are borne by the plaintiff.
Provisions referred to
[1] 민사소송법 제216조 / [2] 민사소송법 제216조, 제385조 / [3] 민사소송법 제216조 / [4] 민사소송법 제216조, 제385조 / [5] 민사소송법 제216조, 제220조, 제385조
Read 2026-10-24 · Cross-read 2026-10-24. All quotes matched against the official text. The Chinese-character placeholders the court used for anonymised parties are given in their Korean readings, and parenthetical Chinese-character glosses are omitted.
Every entry is published only after all quotes have been matched character by character against the official text, and audited by an independent second reading from a different model family across all eight axes. Both agreed axes and text-grounded interpretive divergences are recorded openly. The ledger is a research record, not an assessment of the court or advice on any matter.
Back to the ledger