1. The Defendant entered into an agreement with the Plaintiff on April 15, 2013 regarding 3,041/53,554 shares in the real estate listed in the separate sheet.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On April 15, 2013, the Defendant: (a) promised to the effect that “The real estate recorded in the attached list (hereinafter “the real estate”) in the instant forest (hereinafter “the instant forest”) is promised to transfer the ownership of 920 square meters out of the shares owned by the Defendant” (hereinafter “instant agreement”); and (b) drafted and deliver a letter of undertaking with the same content.

B. The Deceased died on December 16, 2014, and his wife was the inheritor and the deceased, E, and F.

The network D died on June 26, 2014, and there were children G and H as heirs.

C. On May 6, 2015, F was adjudicated on the acceptance of each declaration of renunciation of inheritance on March 31, 2015 (each Daejeon Family Court Branch Decision 2015-Ma30, 2015-Ma225), G with children of the network D, and H decided on September 2015 to have the right to claim the registration of transfer of shares in the instant forest owned by the Plaintiff.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap's 1 to 6, 8, 9 evidence, Gap's 12 evidence (including each number), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. According to the above facts of determination as to the cause of the claim, the Defendant is obligated to implement the procedure for the registration of ownership transfer on the ground of the instant agreement with respect to 920 square meters, namely, 3,041 square meters [=3,041 square meters + 920 square meters x 3.3057 square meters x 3.3057 square meters x a small number of decimal places] of the instant forest, barring any special circumstances, to the Plaintiff who solely inherited the right to claim the registration of ownership transfer on the instant forest.

3. Judgment on the defendant's assertion

가. 강박 주장 피고는, 이 사건 약정은 망인이 험상궂고 덩치가 큰 건달들을 피고에게 보내어 강요에 의하여 체결된 것이라고 주장한다.

The testimony of the witness I alone is not sufficient to recognize the statement of the evidence No. 2 and the testimony of the witness I, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it.

Rather, according to the witness J's testimony and the purport of the whole arguments, the J would find the L-real estate operated by the Defendant by accompanying the Defendant to K upon the request of the Deceased on April 2013.