1. The request for intervention by the independent party of this case shall be dismissed.

2. The Plaintiff:

A. Defendant E Village Society shall be the Nannam-gun, Nannam-gun.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The net G (hereinafter “G”) completed the registration of ownership transfer on May 7, 194 for the instant land on the grounds of “sale on April 15, 1943.”

B. Defendant B, Defendant C, and Defendant D on July 11, 2006, based on the following: (a) pursuant to the former Act on Special Measures for the Registration, etc. of Ownership of Real Estate (Act No. 7500, invalidation; hereinafter the above Act referred to as the “Special Measures Act”), with respect to one-third share of each of the instant land on July 11, 2006, the disposition No. 2, which was issued on October 15, 1990.

The registration of transfer of ownership, such as the entry, shall be completed.

C. On December 29, 2010, the Defendant Senior Citizens Association issued an order on December 29, 2010 on the ground of “sale on December 20, 2010.”

The registration of transfer of ownership, such as the entry, shall be completed.

(hereinafter referred to as "the date of receipt of the registration of ownership transfer completed in the name of the defendants).

G died on July 20, 1989, and the plaintiff is the heir of G.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without a partial dispute, Gap evidence 1, 2, Eul evidence 2, Eul evidence 2, Byung evidence 2, witness H's testimony, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether an application for intervention by an independent party is lawful;

A. On February 28, 1977, the 1st intervenor's assertion 1's representative and five others purchased the instant land from G to KRW 300,000, and occupied and used the instant land upon delivery. On July 11, 2006, in order to obtain permission to divert farmland, Defendant B, Defendant C, and Defendant D have completed the title transfer registration under a title trust with the Defendant Council on December 29, 201, as seen earlier, in accordance with the Act on Special Measures for the Trusting Ownership of the instant land.

However, the Plaintiff asserted that the instant land was inherited solely from G, and filed a claim against the Defendants for the cancellation of each ownership transfer registration, claiming that the ownership transfer registration as of December 29, 2010 and the ownership transfer registration as of July 11, 2006 were null and void, based on the outcome of the principal lawsuit.