2. In full view of the Plaintiff’s evidence No. 5 of the Plaintiff’s claim against Defendant C, witness F’s testimony and the purport of the entire pleadings, the Plaintiff entered into a sales contract with Defendant C on August 11, 2005 with the content that the Plaintiff purchases 1/2 of the instant land.

Therefore, Defendant C is obligated to perform the registration of ownership transfer based on sale on August 11, 2005 with respect to the portion of 1/2 of the instant land to the Plaintiff.

3. Plaintiff’s claim against Defendant B

A. On August 11, 2005, the Plaintiff and E concluded a sales contract with Defendant C to purchase the instant land.

Since Defendant B, the owner of the instant land, forged a sales contract, etc. in the name of Defendant C and completed the instant transfer registration, the instant transfer registration is invalid.

In order to preserve the right to claim the transfer registration of the instant land against Defendant C, the Plaintiff seeks implementation of the procedure for the cancellation registration of the transfer registration of this case, which is null and void in lieu of Defendant C.

B. In the event that the registration of ownership transfer is completed with respect to the judgment real estate, the registrant is presumed to have acquired the ownership not only for the third party but also for the former owner based on a legitimate cause of registration. Therefore, the grounds for invalidation should be asserted and proved in the disputing part.

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 94Da10160, Sept. 13, 1994; 2010Da75648, Nov. 10, 201). The fact that Defendant B completed the instant transfer registration by forging a sales contract on the instant land only with the testimony of evidence Nos. 5 and witness F. F.