1. The defendant on October 18, 2001, with respect to each real estate listed in the separate sheet to the plaintiff, the Jeonju District Court, Jinan District Court, Jinan District Court.

1. Basic facts

A. On July 24, 1998, the Plaintiff, among each real estate listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant real estate”), received several real estate No. 1 from C, the mother on July 24, 1998, and from the deceased D, the father (Death on March 10, 2014), respectively, and completed each registration of ownership transfer in the name of the Plaintiff on the 27th of the same month.

B. After October 18, 2001, the previous Jeju District Court received the Jananan District Court’s receipt of 10217, and the registration of transfer of ownership in the name of the defendant on the ground of sale as of September 22, 2001 (hereinafter “instant registration of transfer of ownership”).

C. Nevertheless, on November 3, 2001, the Plaintiff leased No. 2 of the instant real estate to a non-party inventive Construction Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “non-party company”). After the lease period expires, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the non-party company (former District Court 2001Da72070) and filed a lawsuit seeking damages against the non-party company (the Jeonju District Court 2001DaDa72070) on June 5, 2002 (hereinafter “instant protocol of mediation”).

On April 4, 2003, the Plaintiff received a claim attachment and collection order from the Jeonju District Court 2003TT90 on the basis of the original copy of the instant protocol of conciliation, and the Nonparty Company filed a lawsuit against the Plaintiff to exclude the executory power of the instant protocol of conciliation against the Plaintiff, and finally, on June 24, 2005, the judgment of the court below (the Jeonju District Court 2004Na370) stating that “Compulsory execution under the above protocol of conciliation shall not be allowed only to the extent that it exceeds KRW 63,20,000,000.”

E. After the conclusion of the dispute between the non-party company and the non-party company, the Plaintiff leased the instant real estate or part of the instant real estate to neighboring residents, including E and F, to allow them to set up a farmer’s house and received rice or cash rents.

On the other hand, the non-party Mine Reclamation Corporation (hereinafter referred to as the "Non-party Mine Reclamation Corporation").