2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

Purport of claim and appeal

1...

2. Grounds of the judgment of the court of first instance concerning the dismissal

3. The part of the judgment on the defendant's argument (as stated below, 8-15-2) is as follows.

The Defendant asserts that the Plaintiff purchased the instant land in bad faith with the intention of infringing the Defendant’s property right and completed the registration of ownership transfer, which constitutes an anti-social juristic act. The following facts are asserted: (a) In the real estate auction procedure, where a person who wants to purchase real estate in the real estate auction procedure bears the purchase price in his/her own name and obtains a decision of permission for sale in another person’s name, and thus the sale is permitted in accordance with an agreement with the other person, the person who is the purchaser’s status in the auction procedure is only the title holder; (b) the ownership of the real estate for auction purposes is acquired by the title holder regardless of who is the person who actually bears the purchase price; and (c) in this case, between the person who bears the purchase price and the person who lends the name, the title holder constitutes a title trust relationship (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2005Da664, Apr. 29, 2005). Meanwhile, the title trustee can dispose of the

Even if it does not affect the acquisition of ownership, but in special circumstances, if a third party who purchased trust property from a title trustee actively participated in the act of breach of trust against a title truster, a contract between the title trustee and the third party shall be deemed null and void as an anti-social legal act. In this case, the third party's active participation in the act of breach of trust by the title trustee is simply the trustee.