1. The Plaintiff:

A. On February 6, 2012, Defendant B: (a) with respect to the real estate stated in the attached list, the Daejeon District Court Branch of the astronomical Court.

1. Basic facts

A. On November 11, 201, the Plaintiff sold to Defendant B the real estate indicated in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant real estate”) with the purchase price of KRW 32 million, and received the down payment of KRW 2 million on the day.

B. On February 2, 2012, the Plaintiff received an intermediate payment of KRW 5 million from Defendant B, and subsequently, to Defendant B filed a provisional registration of the right to claim the transfer of ownership at the time (hereinafter “the provisional registration of this case”) with the Daejeon District Court on February 6, 2012, as the receipt of the provisional registration No. 9488 of the Daejeon District Court’s Support for the instant real estate, and delayed the remainder date on April 30, 2012.

C. On April 1, 2013, Defendant Republic of Korea seized Defendant B’s right to claim ownership transfer based on the provisional registration of this case.

As Defendant B failed to pay the balance of the purchase price, the Plaintiff rescinded the sales contract of the instant real estate, and Defendant B renounced the right based on the provisional registration of this case on October 30, 2014.

[Ground of recognition] The fact that there is no dispute, entry of Gap's 1 through 5, purport of whole pleading

2. The assertion and judgment

A. According to the above facts of determination as to the cause of the claim, since the sales contract of the instant real estate was lawfully rescinded due to Defendant B’s nonperformance, Defendant B is obligated to perform the procedure for registration of cancellation of the instant provisional registration to the Plaintiff, and Defendant Republic of Korea is obliged to express its consent on the registration of cancellation of the provisional registration of this case.

B. As to the determination of the Defendant Republic of Korea’s assertion, the Defendant Republic of Korea asserts that the Defendant Republic of Korea cannot respond to the Plaintiff’s claim as a bona fide third party. However, the third party under the proviso of Article 548(1) of the Civil Act refers to not only a person who had a new interest before rescission, but also a person who has acquired complete rights by registration, delivery, etc., based on the legal effect arising from the rescinded contract. As such, the transferee of contractual claims