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

A. On December 20, 1971, the network H (hereinafter “the network”) completed the registration of transfer of ownership based on the sale on December 17, 1971 as the receipt of No. 59756, Dec. 20, 1971, with respect to the I response 642 square meters (hereinafter “land before subdivision”) owned by the Plaintiff.

B. On August 4, 2011, the Deceased died. The Defendants, as their successors, completed the registration of ownership transfer made by inheritance under Defendant B with respect to the 3/13 shares out of the land before subdivision, and with respect to 2/13 shares in each of the 2/13 shares in each of the lands before subdivision, Defendant C, D, E, F, and Dongyang District Court’s respective District Court in each of the Guangyang District Court in the name of Defendant C, D, E, F, and G on February 1

C. Meanwhile, each of the instant real estate was divided from the land before subdivision on November 8, 2012.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence Nos. 1 (including paper numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply) through 3, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion made an illegal use of the Plaintiff’s seal on December 1971 and completed the registration of ownership transfer in the name of the deceased for the land before division. Therefore, the registration of ownership transfer in the name of the deceased is invalid.

Accordingly, the registration of ownership transfer in the name of the Defendants was based on the registration of invalidity of the above cause. Thus, the Defendants should implement the registration procedure for ownership transfer based on the restoration of real name with respect to each share of the Defendants among each real estate of this case to the Plaintiff.

B. In a case where the registration of ownership transfer is completed with respect to real estate in the relevant legal doctrine, such registration titleholder is presumed to have acquired ownership not only the third party but also the former owner through legitimate grounds for registration. Therefore, the grounds for invalidation should be asserted and proved in the grounds for appeal.

(Supreme Court Decision 2010Da75648 Decided November 10, 201). C.

Judgment

The witness evidence No. 4 and the witness J alone.