***** military** side*** L******-**

Service place****** in the military*** in the cotton** in the Ri********** (in this*)

De Representative **

Defendant******************************* (*)

** Si* old* such*****-**

Law Firm **

Attorney Kim*, Kim*, Kim*

************************** (*)

**** such*************** such*****

*** (************************))

**** military** Eup********-****

**************************** (*)

****** Eup************** apartment*** such****

2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the Plaintiff.

The following facts may be acknowledged if there is no dispute between the parties, or if the purport of the whole pleadings is added to the statements in the evidence Nos. 1, 3, and 5.

가. 피고들은 형제· 자매 또는 남매 사이로서 피고 김** 이 그 중 맏이다.

B. On November 16, 2004, the Plaintiff purchased 1.7 billion won from Defendant Kim**** ** Myeon* * Ri* Risan* * 42,004 square meters of forest (hereinafter “the instant forest”) from Defendant Kim* on November 16, 2004, and completed the registration of ownership transfer in the future of the Plaintiff.

C. Defendant Kim**, Kim**, Kim**, Kim**, Kim* filed a lawsuit against the Defendants against the Plaintiff and Defendant Kim *, Kim *, the father of the Defendants, for the cancellation of the ownership transfer registration in the name of the Plaintiff, on March 28, 2005, that the registration in the name of the Defendant Kim*** because he obtained a false certification of the contents that he is the owner of the forest in this case and completed the ownership preservation registration. The registration in the name of the Defendant Kim** is the invalid registration without any ground for the false certification, and the registration of ownership transfer in the name of the Plaintiff is also the invalid registration." The Plaintiff and the Defendant Kim Kim ****** *** * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * the above defendant's withdrawal of the registration based on the false guarantee in the name of the Defendant* * * 2016.

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The plaintiff's assertion

The plaintiff purchased the forest land of this case for the golf course construction business, and the defendant Kim** was obligated to transfer complete right without any legal or factual impediment to the forest of this case, which is the object of sale, as a seller. However, due to disputes between the defendants, the plaintiff sold the land of this case in a state that it is anticipated that the plaintiff's business will be hindered due to the dispute between the defendants, and the remaining defendants filed an unfair lawsuit against the plaintiff, and the plaintiff failed to properly conduct private business, such as the design of the golf course and delay of construction, until the lawsuit for cancellation of the registration of cancellation of the above ownership transfer registration is completed, and thereby, the plaintiff was suffering from mental suffering with the plaintiff's honor. Accordingly, the defendants are jointly and severally liable to pay the plaintiff the amount equivalent to the statutory interest rate on the purchase price of the forest of this case.

B. Determination

(1) First, we examine the claim against Defendant Kim**

First of all, in terms of the acquisition of ownership, insofar as the Plaintiff purchased the forest of this case and completed the registration of transfer of ownership in its name, and thereafter, Defendant Kim **, Kim***, Kim*, Kim*, and the above transfer of ownership, which was instituted by the above Defendants, became final and conclusive in the lawsuit for cancellation of the above transfer of ownership, and the acquisition of the Plaintiff’s ownership is lawful and effective, it cannot be deemed that there was any legal defect prior to the ownership of the forest of this case, and further, there is no evidence to acknowledge it, and even if so, it is deemed that such circumstance falls under the ordinary risk area due to the sale of a large-scale subsidiary movable for the golf course business, and thus, the above argument of the Plaintiff cannot be accepted on any different premise.

(2) Next, we examine the claims against Defendant Kim*, Kim*, Kim**

However, it is important for a party to a legal dispute to seek a final settlement of the dispute against the court. The right to a trial should be respected to the maximum extent, and in determining whether the act of filing a lawsuit or the act of responding to a lawsuit constitutes a tort, careful consideration shall be given so that it does not unfairly restrict the use of the trial system. In a case where a judgment against a person who has filed a civil lawsuit becomes final and conclusive, the filing of a lawsuit against the other party is illegal and there is no factual and legal basis for the rights or legal relations asserted by the complainant in the lawsuit in question, and if it is known that the complainant or ordinary person becomes aware of the same, it is limited to the case where it is recognized that the filing of the lawsuit, such as filing a lawsuit, has considerably lost its reasonableness in light of the purpose and purpose of the trial system (see Supreme Court Decision 98Da52513, Apr. 13, 199).

In this case, the judgment against the plaintiff in the lawsuit seeking the cancellation of the ownership transfer registration in the name of the plaintiff as to the forest of this case becomes final and conclusive. However, in light of the evidence revealed earlier, the whole process of the lawsuit and the contents of the assertion, etc., it seems that the lawsuit has considerably lost reasonableness in light of the purpose and purpose of the trial system, so the plaintiff's assertion on this part cannot be accepted.

3. Conclusion

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim against the defendants is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.

Maz. Maz.

Oralk