1. The request is dismissed.

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

1. Although the Plaintiff’s predecessor D’s pre-owner E did not enter into a sales contract with the Defendants as to the real estate stated in the separate sheet, the registration is null and void. The cause of the registration is the cause of the registration, and the registration of ownership transfer of the Defendants, who received the registration of ownership transfer from E, is null and void. Therefore, the Defendants should register the ownership transfer for the reason of the restoration of the authentic name to the Plaintiff.

2. The main evidence submitted by the Plaintiff that the sales contract between the network D and E was forged is the evidence No. 3 (Written Appraisal).

However, the object of the appraisal is based on the copy, which is not subject to the original of the sale deed, so the accuracy is reduced, and there is no proof of the identity of the original with the original.

Therefore, the evidence submitted by the plaintiff alone cannot be accepted, and it is so decided as per Disposition.