1. The plaintiff's appeal against the defendants is dismissed in entirety.

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

purport, purport, and.

1. The reasoning of the court's explanation concerning this case is as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance other than the following, since the 4th to 15th of the judgment of the court of first instance is the same as the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance. Thus, it is accepted by the main text of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

Of the instant underground floors on July 10, 2002, there is no evidence to acknowledge that there was an agreement between the Plaintiff and the Defendants on the sale and purchase or the transfer of shares on the 210.5 square meters of a store among the instant underground floors, and that the Plaintiff received a judgment on the transfer of ownership in the civil lawsuit filed against E Co., Ltd. pertaining to the shares equivalent to 115.77 square meters of the rooftop area (115.7/273.77). This is merely a registration indicating the ownership relationship of the part of the building rooftop, but it cannot be said that the Plaintiff’s right to claim the transfer of registration against the Defendants solely on the ground that the Plaintiff received the transfer registration on the above shares since it was merely a registration indicating the ownership relationship of the part of the building rooftop and it cannot be said that the Plaintiff purchased the above shares from E Co. 17, 2014. Meanwhile, according to the change in the indication of the registry title on May 16, 2014, the Plaintiff appears to have existed 210.5 square meters of the instant underground floors.

() Since the above part is different from the area of 115.77 square meters in a rooftop that the Plaintiff purchased, the Plaintiff’s claim against the Defendants on the premise that the Plaintiff is a buyer or an owner of the said store 210.5 square meters is without merit (the Plaintiff is based on the related documents that the Defendants, even if they acquired each share, are holding only shares of each part of the area of 158 square meters in the underground floor, but the Defendants’ household affairs are part of shares of the amusement facilities (specialized restaurants).