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

A. The plaintiff and the defendant are high school establishments.

B. The Plaintiff and the Defendant, in advance, agreed to sell three lots of land to E in accordance with the Agricultural Infrastructure Development and Expansion Project for Land under the annexed Table No. 1 attached to the Plaintiff’s attached Table No. 1, on October 13, 2017, including that the Plaintiff’s shape C and the Plaintiff shared one-half shares, the land substitution should be made within G 3683 square meters on the same date as G 3683 square meters on the land indicated in the attached Table No. 2 of the real estate list No. 1, where the Plaintiff and the Plaintiff shared one-half shares, and that H 3967 square meters on the same date as H 3920 square meters on the 3920 square meters of the Plaintiff’s shape C-ownership on the same date.

Accordingly, on May 7, 2002, the Plaintiff sold the above three parcels of land to E, and received the total purchase price from E, and the Defendant purchased the said three parcels of land from E on May 14, 2002 and repaid the purchase price to E in installments in 20 years.

On June 3, 2002, with respect to the above three parcels of land, each registration of transfer of ownership was completed in the order of the defendant on the grounds of sale as of May 7, 2002 from the plaintiff and C to the E agency, and on the grounds of sale as of May 14, 2002 to the defendant.

[Ground for Recognition: Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1-3, Gap evidence 2-1 through 3, Eul evidence 3 and 4, the purport of whole pleadings]

2. The assertion and judgment

A. 1 Plaintiff’s assertion as to the Plaintiff’s primary claim is that the Defendant sold the said three parcels of land to E, which was owned by the Plaintiff and the Plaintiff’s shape, and the Defendant, on the face of a week, did so from E, and agreed to transfer the ownership of the said three parcels of land at any time upon the Plaintiff’s request for the return of the said land.

Accordingly, a kind of bilateral title trust contract is concluded between the plaintiff and the defendant with respect to the above three parcels of land through mediating the E agency.

The bilateral title trust agreement is null and void under Article 4 (1) of the Real Estate Real Name Act, and the defendant is above the plaintiff.