1. All of the plaintiff's claims are dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff and the Defendant are two children among six children, who are the inheritor of Nonparty deceased C (Death on September 26, 2014), and are female of the Plaintiff, and the Defendant is a female of the Defendant.

B. As to the real estate listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant real estate”), the ownership transfer registration under the Defendant’s name (hereinafter “instant registration”) was completed on December 21, 2012 due to the sale on December 20, 2012, which was received by the Jeonju District Court No. 59159, Dec. 21, 2012 (hereinafter “the instant transaction”).

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without partial dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 3, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The plaintiff's cause of claim and judgment on the cause of claim

A. The plaintiff primarily claims that the registration of this case in the name of the defendant with respect to the real estate of this case is invalid due to the most trade, and the defendant is obligated to perform the procedure for cancellation registration of this case to the deceased C. Thus, the plaintiff asserts to the purport that he is entitled to inheritance or legal reserve of inheritance.

Therefore, if the transfer registration of ownership has been made in 199, it is presumed that not only the third party but also the former owner acquires ownership by legitimate grounds for registration. Therefore, if a person who intends to deny it claims the invalidation of the grounds for registration and seeks the cancellation of the transfer of ownership, he/she has the responsibility to assert and prove the fact that it constitutes the grounds for invalidation.

I would like to say.

(See Supreme Court Decision 2009Da105215 Decided March 13, 2014, etc.). In the instant case, it is not sufficient to acknowledge that the Plaintiff’s assertion premised on the premise that the instant transaction was the most trade, solely on the basis of the descriptions of health class and evidence Nos. 1 and 22, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it. Thus, the Plaintiff’s assertion premised on it is without merit.

B. The judgment on the conjunctive cause of claim also is the conjunctive cause.