소유권이전등기절차이행청구의 소
1.Paragraphs 1 and 2 of the judgment of the first instance, including the preliminary claim expanded at the trial.
1. The reasoning of this court concerning this part, such as the conclusion of a sales contract C with the Plaintiff, etc. and the registration of ownership transfer under the name of the Defendant, is the same as the entry of “1. Basic Facts” in the judgment of the court of first instance, except for the case where “14 lots” in the fourth sentence of the judgment of the court of first instance is “15 lots”. Thus, this is cited pursuant to the main sentence of Article 420
2. The parties' assertion and judgment
A. On May 6, 2005, the Plaintiff asserted that the Plaintiff agreed to distribute five parcels of land among the instant lands to the Plaintiff on May 6, 2005. Moreover, the Defendant sold W land to a third party and paid 1/2 out of the purchase price, and decided to distribute the land to the Plaintiff instead of selling the land to V. The Defendant promised to distribute 45/1,085 shares of J land to the Plaintiff. Accordingly, pursuant to the agreement, etc. on May 6, 2005, the Defendant is obligated to implement land transaction permission procedures, and there is no evidence to acknowledge that the Plaintiff and the witness’s share distribution agreement did not exist between the Plaintiff and the witness’s share distribution as otherwise alleged in the Plaintiff.
Therefore, the plaintiff's primary claim of this case is without merit.
B. On June 16, 2003, the Plaintiff’s assertion 1, D, and E purchased from C the price of KRW 1,128,50,000 from the Defendant’s mother of KRW 10,312 square meters of F forest land owned by C in the land transaction permission zone. The Plaintiff agreed to acquire 1/2 shares of the said purchase subject matter.
(2).