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

A. On November 1, 1996, the Defendant completed the registration of ownership transfer for reasons of sale on October 28, 1996 with respect to each real estate listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant real estate”).

B. On February 12, 1999, the Plaintiff filed a provisional injunction order with Suwon District Court 99Kadan100764 on February 18, 199 by claiming the right to claim the ownership transfer registration of the instant real estate as the preserved right. The Plaintiff filed a provisional injunction order with Suwon District Court 9Kadan10764 on February 18, 199.

[Evidence: Evidence No. 1 (including paper numbers)]

2. The parties' assertion

A. On September 20, 1998, the Plaintiff’s assertion entered into a contract with the Defendant to purchase the instant real estate with the price of KRW 70 million. On September 20, 1998, the Plaintiff paid KRW 10 million for the down payment on September 20, 1998, KRW 30 million for the intermediate payment on October 5, 1998, and KRW 30 million for the remainder on October 20, 1998.

Therefore, the Defendant is obligated to register the transfer of ownership to the Plaintiff based on the above sale of the instant real estate.

B. Defendant’s assertion 1) The Plaintiff was not a sales contract for the instant real estate under the name of the Defendant, but a sales contract for the instant real estate was actually concluded with the Defendant, and only a sales contract was prepared on September 20, 1998 to impose a provisional disposition for the prohibition of disposal in the name of the Plaintiff, and the instant real estate was subsequently owned by C pursuant to the agreement with the Plaintiff and C. The Plaintiff filed the instant lawsuit for the purpose of pecuniary profit by being aware of the absence of any substantive right to file a claim for the registration of ownership transfer of the instant real estate due to the foregoing reasons. Accordingly, the Plaintiff’s claim constitutes abuse of right, and thus constitutes abuse of right, in violation of the principle of good faith, and there is no benefit of qualification or lawsuit for the protection of rights. Accordingly, the instant lawsuit should be dismissed as unlawful).