2. Claims against Defendant B and ancillary claims against Defendant C.

A. The Plaintiff filed a claim against Defendant B, around October 14, 2008, entered into an agreement with his own denying Defendant B on the trust of the name of the owner with respect to 2030 square meters (hereinafter “instant real estate”). The Plaintiff purchased the instant real estate and made the name of the owner of the said real estate as Defendant B. Since the title trust agreement was terminated by delivery of a duplicate of the instant complaint, Defendant B is obligated to implement the registration procedure for ownership transfer on the ground of the cancellation of title trust with respect to the instant real estate.

B. (1) The primary claim against Defendant C was made by means of a false conspiracy with Defendant C, who is one’s own owner, with a promise to sell and purchase the instant real estate and a provisional registration of the right to claim ownership transfer in the future of Defendant C. Since the sale promise is null and void, Defendant C is obligated to implement the procedure for registration cancellation of the right to claim ownership transfer on the instant real estate, and the Plaintiff against Defendant B.

In order to preserve the claim under paragraph (1), the defendant B requests the cancellation of the provisional registration of the right to claim ownership transfer registration.

(2) The Defendants’ reservation made on June 24, 2009 by the conjunctive Defendants to sell and purchase the instant real estate against the Plaintiff is a fraudulent act against the Plaintiff, and thus, the Plaintiff’s obligee’s right of revocation is sought to revoke the above sales contract, and Defendant C is obligated to implement the procedure for registration of cancellation of the transfer right to the instant real estate as restitution

3. Determination as to the claim against the defendant B

A. In order to reverse the presumption of a specific property under Article 830(1) of the Civil Act, the other spouse bears the actual burden of the price for the pertinent real estate and proves that the real estate was acquired by himself/herself in order to possess it (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 98Du15177, Dec. 22, 1998). Thus, the other spouse is simply the other spouse.