A. On July 8, 1939, the Plaintiff moved to the territory of Canada around February 1971 while he was born as the descendants of D's house from the G's harmony in Gyeonggi-do.

B. On December 19, 1974, the Plaintiff completed the ownership transfer registration (hereinafter “instant ownership transfer registration”) based on the sale of the land on the 2nd 9th 9th Y C Forest land (hereinafter “instant land”) owned by the Defendant, who was the Defendant under his own name.

C. After the completion of the registration of transfer of ownership of this case, the Defendant has been managing the land of this case by leasing the land of this case to E, etc. and paying taxes imposed on the land of this case.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap 1, 2, 3 evidence, Eul 1, 2, and 3 evidence (including a Serial number; hereinafter the same shall apply), witness F, G, H's testimony, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination on the cause of the claim

A. The gist of both claims is that the plaintiff, around the other hand, entered into a false sales contract with the defendant, who is a person to avoid disadvantages arising from the regulation on real estate owned by non-resident owners while the plaintiff was living in Canada, and completed the registration of ownership transfer of this case for this reason. Since the above sales contract is null and void as it is based on the false agreement, the registration of ownership transfer of this case is also null and void. Preliminaryly, the registration of ownership transfer of this case is a title trust agreement that the plaintiff would transfer to the defendant, who is the plaintiff, and only the name of the defendant, and will transfer to the defendant, and is completed accordingly, the registration of ownership transfer of this case is null and void. Thus, the defendant

As to this, the defendant concludes a sales contract with the plaintiff on the land of this case.