2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

On January 30, 2007, the Deceased donated each real estate stated in the purport of the claim to the Plaintiff and prepared a notarial deed.

At the time, the Deceased donated the real estate located in Seo-gu Daejeon, Daejeon, as well as I, J, and K, to the Plaintiff.

On November 12, 2007, the Defendant completed the registration of ownership transfer in accordance with the Act on Special Measures for the Registration, etc. of Ownership of Real Estate, which was enforced at the time of donation on the grounds of donation on February 21, 1995.

On December 24, 2009, the registration of ownership transfer was made on the 31st of the same month on the ground that J and I real estate was donated in the name of the defendant, and on K, the registration of ownership transfer was made on the grounds of donation in the name of the defendant's wife L.

The Deceased completed the registration of ownership transfer under his name on December 29, 2006, Seo-gu Daejeon H, but transferred the registration of ownership transfer to M on October 2, 2012.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence 1-3, Gap evidence 2-1-7, Eul evidence 1, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Judgment on the plaintiff's assertion

A. The plaintiff asserts to the effect that the registration of transfer of ownership completed with a written confirmation issued by the Office where the deceased and the Plaintiff were located without knowledge is invalid due to the lapse of extinctive prescription due to the absence of grounds or the rights based on the underlying juristic act extinguished.

Witness

In full view of N’s legal statement, Eul evidence Nos. 2, and fact-finding inquiry reply with the Embryp group, the Defendant did not leave the deceased’s body so that he did not live together with children, and raised dogs and salts with the deceased, and the deceased knew that the ownership of the real estate stated in the purport of the claim has been transferred to the Defendant.