The plaintiff's primary claim, including a claim changed at the trial.

A. In the aggregate of 2,403 square meters and C forest land and 3,967 square meters (hereinafter “instant land”) before Dong-si, Si-si, the land partitioned and registered conversion is the land in E.

B. On January 17, 1961, the registration of ownership transfer was completed in F, the father of the defendant, and on January 21, 1989, the registration of ownership transfer was completed on March 28, 1983 on the part of the defendant on March 28, 1983.

C. The Plaintiff is G’s children.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 2, Gap evidence 3-1, 2, Gap evidence 1, 12, Eul evidence 5-1 through 4, the purport of the whole pleadings, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination as to the claim for the part in possession of the instant case

A. (1) On August 23, 1961, the Plaintiff’s father, G, the Plaintiff’s father, purchased the possession portion of the instant one from F, the Defendant’s father, and the Plaintiff was donated from G on August 8, 2013.

Therefore, the Defendant, F’s heir, is obligated to directly implement the registration procedure for ownership transfer to the Plaintiff, who received the donation of the one possession portion of this case.

B) Defendant 1 did not have entered into a sales contract with G for the portion of possession of the instant case. ② In addition, the instant lawsuit is sought against the Defendant, who is the heir of F, the final buyer, seeking the implementation of the procedure for ownership transfer registration against the Defendant, who is the first seller. However, the Plaintiff cannot seek a direct claim against the Defendant, unless there is any agreement between the parties’ intention to omit the intermediate registration, as a right to refuse the intermediate registration. (2) In the judgment of this court, the instant lawsuit is deemed to have entered into a sales contract between G and F on the portion of possession

According to the evidence Nos. 5-1, 2, and 9-1 through 4 of evidence Nos. 5-1, 1961 (short-term 4294), it was prepared between the J and the Defendant’s father, who appears to be the interest of G, on the “10 square meters of the purchase price at 100 square meters within 9-1, 9-1, 1961.”