A. The land in the above three lots is the land of this case, and the lot number, land category, and the area are specified only in the case of marking individual land) and the registration of ownership preservation (transfer) was made to each F on April 10, 203. The registration of ownership transfer was made to the Defendant on the grounds of each transaction on April 10, 2003.

B. The Plaintiff filed the instant lawsuit, asserting that each of the instant lands was the real estate that was originally trusted to F, and the Defendant knowingly completed the registration of ownership transfer with respect to each of the instant lands, stating that “the Defendant shall implement the procedures for ownership transfer due to the termination of title trust with respect to each of the instant lands.”

C. On November 7, 2014, when the instant lawsuit was pending, the Plaintiff and the Defendant agreed on November 7, 2014, “The Defendant completed the registration of ownership transfer with respect to C forest land 1736 square meters among each of the instant land, and the Plaintiff shall withdraw the instant lawsuit.”

Even if the above agreement was reached, the Defendant did not register the transfer of ownership to the Plaintiff with respect to C forest land 1736 square meters, and the Plaintiff is also in the lawsuit of this case.

Based on the agreement of the paragraph, the claim and the cause of the claim were modified by seeking the implementation of the ownership transfer registration procedure only with respect to C forest land of 1736 square meters.

[Reasons for Recognition] Each entry of Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, and 6-1, 2, 3, and 11-1, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination on the claim of this case

A. According to the facts stated earlier, the Defendant, barring any special circumstance, is obligated to implement the procedure for the registration of ownership transfer with respect to C forest land of 1736 square meters in accordance with the transfer agreement on November 7, 2014.

B. Although the Defendant asserts that the above agreement has no effect, according to the evidence No. 11, the agreement between the Plaintiff and the Defendant was clearly concluded on November 7, 2014, and the implementation thereof.