소유권이전등기
1. The plaintiff's claim against the defendant is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
1. The plaintiff and the defendant are the deceased C's descendants.
Attached Form
The real estate listed in the list 1 and 2 (hereinafter collectively referred to as “each of the instant land”; and individually “D land”, “E land” and “F forest land” (hereinafter referred to as “F forest land”) were owned by G. On January 18, 1979, the ownership transfer registration was made in the name of H and 21 (including the Plaintiff and the Defendant) (the ground for inheritance on June 25, 1955) and the co-ownership transfer registration (the ground for co-ownership share donation on March 12, 1950) was made in the name of H and 21 (including the Plaintiff and the Defendant).
On October 24, 2002, the F forest was registered for the transfer of ownership (the ground for the acquisition of the land for public use on October 22, 2002).
【Ground for Recognition: Each entry of Gap's evidence 1 to 6, Eul's evidence 1, 3 through 5 (including additional number, if any)
2. The parties' assertion
A. The plaintiff's assertion: The plaintiff, I, J, K, and L, who are inheritors of C and G, agreed on September 1980 as to the real estate of this case, and the defendant is obligated to perform the registration of transfer on or around September 1980 by agreement or by prescription.
B. Defendant’s assertion: (a) around September 1980, the Plaintiff, I, J, K, and L received KRW 1.5 million from the Defendant and renounced the right to the instant land.
3. Comprehensively taking account of the evidence and the purport of the entire pleadings in the statement in Eul evidence Nos. 2 and Eul evidence, the plaintiff et al. received KRW 1.5 million from the defendant on January 18, 1979 and renounced ownership of the inherited property. The phrases written on the receipt (Evidence No. 2) at the time are as follows.
Some of the 3230 square meters in forest M are cultivated by N, A, and L in the forest. If the sale of forest is based on circumstances, the Plaintiff’s assertion that the sale of forest shall be made to three persons within the market price contract and the balance period for the land cultivated to the said three persons at that time.