1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. As to the instant building, the registration of ownership transfer was completed due to the sale on July 22, 2010 as of the instant building, and the fact that the Defendant currently occupies the instant building is either a dispute between the parties or may be acknowledged by the statement in Gap evidence No. 1.

With respect to the Plaintiff’s assertion that the Plaintiff did not have legitimate right to possess the building of this case, the Defendant purchased the building of this case from C in the amount of KRW 4 million, and the Defendant purchased the building of this case in the title trust to the Plaintiff, at the Defendant’s wife, and thus, the Plaintiff

2. On the basis of findings of recognition of a panel: The following facts may be recognized by taking into account a part of Gap evidence No. 5, a statement of Eul evidence No. 1 through 5, and a whole purport of pleadings:

① From October 8, 2007, the Defendant and his children died in the instant building owned by C. Since C, C decided to sell the instant building to the Defendant for KRW 4 million on the condition that the Defendant continues to work as his or her Kim Farmingman, and the Defendant consented thereto.

② A around March 2010, the Defendant deducted 4 million won from the Defendant’s wage under the name of the purchase price for the instant building from the Defendant’s wage, but did not complete the registration of ownership transfer for the instant building.

③ There is a problem for the Plaintiff to transfer ownership under the name of the Defendant because it is difficult for the Plaintiff to transfer ownership to the Defendant’s family member at the time. C entered into a sales contract for the instant building on July 21, 2010 (hereinafter “instant sales contract”) and completed the registration of ownership transfer to the Plaintiff.

▷위와 같이 인정된 사실과 다음에 보는 사정을 종합하면, 원고와 매도인 C, 피고 내부적으로는 이 사건 매매계약에 따른 법률효과를...