The instant lawsuit is dismissed.

Litigation costs shall be borne by the plaintiff.

The Plaintiff’s assertion: (a) the real estate indicated in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant real estate”) was transferred from D again by the Plaintiff that the Defendant and his husband C sold the real estate to D; and (b) the Defendant sold the said real estate to E again and completed the registration of ownership transfer as stated in the purport of the claim on August 2013; (c) thus, the registration of ownership transfer should be cancelled by the double selling of the said real estate, which is null and void.

A lawsuit seeking the cancellation of registration against a person who is not the person liable for registration, who loses his right or is not the person who is not the person (the title holder of registration or his general successor) due to the registration in the form stated in the registry (see Supreme Court Decision 93Da39225, Feb. 25, 1994) shall be deemed unlawful as a lawsuit against the non-party eligible for registration (see Supreme Court Decision 93Da39225, Feb. 25, 1994). If the purport of the entire argument is added to the statement in the evidence No. 1, the defendant is the title holder of the initial registration of ownership concerning the instant real estate, but the plaintiff's claim for cancellation is the ownership transfer registration stated in the purport of the claim concerning the transfer of the instant real estate from No. 1 A&D to E, and the plaintiff is seeking the cancellation procedure against the defendant who is not the person liable for registration, even though the plaintiff must seek the cancellation procedure against E.

Therefore, the plaintiff's lawsuit of this case is unlawful and dismissed, and it is so decided as per Disposition.