(a) Defendant KimAA’s procedures for ownership transfer registration on the ground of the recovery of authentic names to Gangnam (OO-O-OOOOO, O-OO-OO-O, O-O-O-O95)

B. Defendant ParkB shall comply with the procedure for the cancellation of the registration of the right to claim transfer of ownership, which was completed by the Busan District Court Busan District Court No. 24045 on April 25, 2007, with the registration of cancellation of the right to claim transfer of ownership.

2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the Defendants.

Cheong-gu Office

The same shall apply to the order.

The following facts do not conflict between the plaintiff and the defendant KimA, and there is no dispute between the plaintiff and the defendant ParkB between the plaintiff and the defendant ParkB, or they can be acknowledged by taking account of the whole purport of the pleadings in the descriptions of Gap evidence 1-1, 2, Gap evidence 2, Gap evidence 3-1 through 4, Gap evidence 4-1, 2, and 5-1 through 5, and Eul evidence 1.

A. On February 3, 2003, the director of the Seosan District Tax Office under the Plaintiff’s jurisdiction imposed the time limit for payment on the OO of global income tax for the global income tax for the tax year 2000 on February 28, 2003, and on June 10, 2009 as to the global income tax OOO of the global income tax for the tax year 2007 until June 30, 2009, on which the time limit for payment was June 30, 2009. However, the Gangnam did not pay the said unpaid global income tax. If the additional dues and increased additional dues are included, the amount of tax in the amount of tax in the present Gangnam reaches the KRW OO.

B. After building each real estate listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter referred to as "each real estate of this case"), Gangnam entered into a title trust agreement with Defendant KimA with regard to each of the above real estate in order to be exempted from the plaintiff's compulsory execution. Pursuant to the agreement, Busan District Court's Busan District Court's registration office on May 17, 2004 (hereinafter referred to as "the preservation registration of each real estate of this case") was completed as Defendant KimA's registration No. 30520 on May 17, 2004.

C. After that, the Gangnam made a false purchase and sale reservation contract with Defendant ParkB, which had had the same business interest with respect to each of the instant real estate by threatening to enforce compulsory execution by Defendant KimB, on April 24, 2007, and completed the provisional registration of the right to claim transfer of ownership under Defendant ParkB’s name (hereinafter “the provisional registration of this case”). < Amended by Act No. 24045, Apr. 25, 2007; Act No. 8538, Apr. 25, 2007; Act No. 854, Apr. 25, 2007>

D. At present, Gangnam is insolvent, and it does not exercise any right to the preservation registration of this case and the provisional registration of this case.

2. Determination

According to the above facts, the title trust agreement between the Gangnam and the defendant KimA with respect to each of the instant real estate and the preservation registration of this case based thereon shall be null and void in violation of the Act on the Registration of Real Estate under Actual Titleholder's Name. In addition, the provisional registration of this case based on the purchase and sale reservation made on April 24, 2007 and the provisional registration made on the basis thereof between the defendant KimA and the defendant ParkbB shall be null and void as the false declaration of agreement made on the basis of a false

Therefore, the preservation registration of this case and the provisional registration of this case shall be cancelled as the registration of each invalidation. As long as the Gangwon-CC, which acquired ownership by the construction of each of the real estate of this case, does not exercise in sequence the right to the preservation registration of this case and the right to the right to the cancellation registration of the provisional registration of this case against Defendant KimA and Defendant ParkbB by law, the defendant KimA, as the creditor of the Gangwon-CC, has the obligation to implement the cancellation registration procedure of the provisional registration of this case to the Gangwon-CC, instead of the cancellation registration procedure of the preservation registration of this case.

3. Conclusion

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim against the defendants is justified, and it is so decided as per Disposition.