1. The Defendant-Counterclaim Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) has jurisdiction over the real estate stated in the separate sheet to the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant).

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff and C are the pro-child (son E) of the deceased D (the deceased’s death on September 2, 2013, hereinafter referred to as “the deceased”), and the Defendant is a person living together with the deceased.

B. On June 28, 2006, each registration of ownership preservation was completed in the name of the deceased, the plaintiff, and C on January 29, 2010 with respect to each one-third share, each of which was newly constructed on or around June 28, 2006, and the registration of ownership transfer was completed on May 24, 2013 with respect to each one-third share of the deceased on May 24, 2013.

C. On September 9, 2013, immediately after the deceased’s death, the Defendant filed a provisional registration of the right to claim ownership transfer registration on the ground of a pre-sale agreement (hereinafter “the provisional registration of this case”) with the inn of this case on September 9, 2013, and completed the registration of ownership transfer on October 28, 2013 for shares in C’s possession.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 2, Eul evidence 1, 2, and 7 (including branch numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply)

2. Summary of the parties' arguments;

A. The Defendant asserted that the provisional registration of this case was not made by the Plaintiff’s genuine declaration of intent, or by deception, since the Defendant received necessary documents from the Plaintiff that did not know the meaning of the provisional registration because the Plaintiff did not complete the capacity of separation by reason of the lack of any transactional relationship between the Plaintiff and the Plaintiff. Therefore, the provisional registration of this case should be invalidated or revoked

Since the defendant has completed the provisional registration of this case against the plaintiff's will by using the plaintiff's seal impression, etc. in his custody, the above provisional registration shall be null and void.

B. The Defendant’s assertion 1 was newly constructed by the Defendant as the money, but the instant provisional registration was made in title trust with the Plaintiff, etc., and the instant provisional registration was made for the purpose of returning the title trust property.