1. As to the Plaintiff’s share 1/10 of each of the real estate listed in the separate sheet, Defendant B, C, and D, Defendant F, and Defendant F, 2.

1. Facts and progress of the case;

A. On June 29, 190, the Plaintiff, Defendant B, C, and F acquired a large number of land of G G in Jeju, including each land listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “each land of this case”). Around June 29, 1990, each of the land of this case was jointly owned by 1/10, and each of the land of this case was certified on November 12, 1992.

B. After that, as a result of a partial change in co-ownership relation with each of the instant lands due to sale, gift, inheritance, compulsory auction, etc., the Plaintiff held 1/10 shares, 1/10 shares, 1/10 shares, 2/10 shares, 3/10 shares, 3/10 shares, and H (the co-defendants of this case but the decision in lieu of conciliation became final and conclusive before the conclusion of pleadings).

C. In 207, Defendant B, C, and F filed a lawsuit against the Plaintiff, etc. seeking a transfer of share on each land confirmed as the owner in the above certificate of certification, and obtained a favorable judgment (Seoul District Court Decision 2007Gahap17997 Decided January 8, 2009). Accordingly, the title of ownership was organized on some parcels.

In the same manner as in the above lawsuit, the Plaintiff filed against the Defendants a claim against the Defendants for the registration of transfer of equity rights based on the termination of mutual title trust with respect to each of the instant land, the Plaintiff confirmed as ownership in the above certificate.

[Based on the recognition] Defendant B: The non-contentious facts, and the remainder of the Defendants indicated in Gap 1 through 3 (including the number of branch numbers) : The judgment of deemed confession (Article 208(3)2 of the Civil Procedure Act)

2. Determination

A. According to the above facts of determination as to the cause of the claim, the plaintiff and the defendants are in a sectional title trust relationship with respect to each of the land of this case, i.e., a mutual title trust relationship, and they expressed their intent to terminate the title trust with the defendants.