1. The Defendant has caused the Plaintiff to recover the true name with respect to one-third shares of B 49m2, one-third of which is one-third shares in B 49m2, one week.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The ownership transfer registration under the name of the defendant was made on November 7, 1996, No. 27346, which was received on November 7, 1996, with respect to the share of 1/3 (hereinafter “share of this case”) among the share of 49 square meters in B B, 499 square meters in Naju-Gun, which had a domicile in Naju-Gun C, and the ownership transfer registration was made on September 11, 1948.

B. D’s property of the deceased E under the name of the deceased E (Death on May 9, 1946) was inherited to F on October 5, 1975 due to the death of F on October 5, 1975, and D’s right was transferred to G, H, I, J, K, L, M, N, N, andO, including the Plaintiff, the final heir.

To the purport, each of the parties entered into an assignment contract with the Plaintiff.

【Ground of recognition】 The fact that there has been no dispute, each entry of Gap's 1 through 8 (including virtual number), and the purport of whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. According to the above facts, since the ownership transfer registration under the name of the defendant was made in the name of Japan because the ownership of the real estate in this case was owned by the deceased E, and the ownership transfer registration under the name of the defendant was made, the ownership transfer registration under the name of the defendant with respect to the above shares shall be null and void. As so requested, the defendant shall be liable to implement the procedure for ownership transfer registration for the real estate in this case to the plaintiff according to the purport of the agreement on

B. As to this, the Defendant asserted that the acquisition by prescription of the registry on November 7, 2006 and the acquisition by prescription on November 7, 2016 after the lapse of 10 years from November 7, 2006, for which the registration of ownership transfer with respect to the portion of the instant real estate was completed, the registration of ownership transfer in the Defendant’s name on the said portion is valid as a registration consistent with the substantive relationship, and thus, the Defendant occupied the instant real estate from November 7, 1996.