1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

3. Attached list of bonds in the judgment of the court of first instance.

1. The reasoning of the judgment of this court citing the judgment of the court of first instance is that of the court of first instance, except in the following cases, and such reasoning is acceptable in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

(However, the part on co-defendants of the first instance court, which is separated and confirmed in the first instance trial, is excluded). [The part on which it is used] In the 7th instance judgment of the first instance, the part on which “YY 187 square meters” is divided from the 1,864 square meters in the 1,864 square meters in the 15th instance judgment.”

Part 8 of the judgment of the court of first instance, from 20 to 9.2 of the judgment of the court of first instance, "this argument is without merit."

“Around 10 years have passed since the Plaintiff’s right to claim for the transfer registration of ownership against the Defendant based on the letter of recognition of the ownership transfer registration case (Seoul District Court 2001Gahap47462), the Defendant asserted that the Plaintiff’s right to claim for the transfer of the right to claim the transfer of the deposit of this case against the Defendant is groundless. However, a person who trusted the real estate owner may, barring any special circumstance, at any time terminate the title trust and claim the performance of the transfer registration procedure based on ownership for the reason of termination of the trust. Such right to claim for registration is not subject to the extinctive prescription (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 91Da34387, Nov. 26, 1991). Accordingly, the Defendant’s assertion contrary to this is without merit. Meanwhile, even if the Defendant’s right to claim for the transfer of deposit of this case’s real estate has expired, each of the above rights to claim for the Defendant’s transfer registration has not been asserted during the period from March 30, 20009 to Nov. 29, 2014.

2. Accordingly, the part of the judgment of the court of first instance against the defendant is legitimate, and the defendant's appeal is without merit.