I am puzzled by the question. 'Lav ha'Nitak la'Asei' by definition, means a Lav that one violated and that one now comes to rectify with an Asei that the Torah attached to it. If one fulfils the Asei only, without violating the Lav, then it is not a 'Lav ha'Nitak la'Asei'. Right?

Having said that, however, there is a Sugya in Makos (beginning at the end of 14b) which begins with a statement by Rabbi Yochanan, that a 'Lav she'Kadmo Asei' receives Malkos. Rashi defines a 'Lav she'Kadmo Asei' as a Lav which the Torah attaches to an Asei, but where it is possible to fulfil the Asei before violating the Lav (even if one did not actually do so). An example of this is a man who raped a girl, married her and then violated a Lav by divorcing her. The Torah obligates him to take her back forever. He could of course, have married her forever without violating the Lav, making this a Lav she'Kadmo Asei'.

be'Virchas Kol Tuv

Eliezer Chrysler