소유권이전등기청구권보전가등기의말소
1. The plaintiffs' lawsuit against the defendant C is dismissed.
2. The Plaintiff B: (a) forest G 2515 square meters in Seosan-si; (b)
A. Defendant D.
1. On August 7, 2003, Defendant C completed a share transfer registration in its name with respect to 1/4 shares of H 5207 square meters of forest land in Seosan-si (hereinafter “instant land before the instant partition”).
② On August 29, 2003, Defendant C made a provisional registration of the right to claim the transfer of shares on August 28, 2003 with respect to the portion of 3306/5207 out of the land before the instant partition to I on August 29, 2003; on the same day, Defendant C made a provisional registration of the right to claim the transfer of shares on August 28, 2003 with respect to the share of 3306/5207 out of the land before the instant partition; on the same day, Defendant F made a provisional registration of the right to claim the transfer of shares on August 18, 2010 with respect to the share of 3306/5207 out of the land before the instant partition; and I completed the provisional registration of the right to claim the transfer of shares on August 16, 2010.
③ On May 20, 2015, the instant land was subject to registration conversion with G forest land of 51310 square meters, and was divided into G forest of 2515 square meters (hereinafter “instant land”) and J forest of 2615 square meters.
④ Meanwhile, on November 13, 2003, Defendant C completed the share transfer registration for the share of 3306/5207 out of the land before the instant partition to Defendant D on November 10, 2003. However, Plaintiff B completed the share transfer registration for the share of Defendant C and Defendant D on August 5, 2016 regarding the entire share of the instant land on August 5, 2016.
[Reasons for Recognition] Defendant C, D, and F: Each entry in Gap evidence 2 (including a branch number), as a whole, defendant E: A's assertion of confession due to the absence of the defendant
2. We examine the legitimacy of the plaintiffs' action against the defendant C by ex officio determination on the legitimacy of the plaintiffs' action against the defendant C.
The Plaintiffs asserted that Defendant D, E, and F’s right to make a full reservation had expired, and they concluded against Defendant D, E, and F regarding the instant land in the name of Defendant D, E, and F.