1. Defendant (Appointed Party) G is the Suwon District Court with respect to the Plaintiff’s share of 8/261 of the real estate stated in the separate sheet.

1. Determination as to the Plaintiff’s claim against Defendant (Appointed Party) G

A. The claim indication 1) The real estate listed in the separate sheet is the real estate owned by the network H. 2) The networkF completed the registration of transfer of ownership on the ground of sale under the receipt No. 5000 on February 22, 1984, even though the real estate was not purchased from the network H.

3) The Plaintiff is the heir of the deceased H’s 8/261 shares, and the Defendant (Appointed Party) and the Selection are the heir of the deceased F. B. The confession judgment (Articles 208(3)2 and 150(3) of the Civil Procedure Act)

2. Determination as to the Plaintiff’s claim against Defendant B, C, D, and E 1) Since the transfer registration under the name of Suwon District Court on February 22, 1984 was null and void due to the Plaintiff’s claim F’s transfer registration under the name of 5000, which was received on February 22, 1984, without any grounds for registration, the cause of each transfer registration under the name of the Defendants transferred from the former is null and void. Therefore, inasmuch as the Plaintiff’s transfer registration under the registry on real estate is completed within the scope of shares inherited, the Defendants are obliged to implement the registration procedure for cancellation of each transfer registration under the name of the Defendants transferred from the former. (2) As long as the Plaintiff’s transfer registration under the registry on real estate is completed, the procedure and cause should be presumed lawful, and the parties asserting the relevant procedure and cause unreasonable (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2007Da91756, Mar. 27, 2008).

3. Thus, the plaintiff's claim against the defendant (appointed party) G is justified, and this is accepted.