1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. In full view of the purport of each statement in Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 3 and 5 (including additional numbers), the plaintiff's father Eul made a pre-sale agreement with the defendant on August 23, 2002 with regard to the purchase and sale of at least 30,180 square meters (hereinafter "the land in this case"), which is owned by the defendant, with the defendant, on behalf of the plaintiff on August 23, 2002, with regard to the purchase and sale of at least 30,000 square meters, and on August 26, 2002, with regard to the right to claim ownership transfer registration on the ground of the pre-sale agreement in the name of the plaintiff on August 26, 202. According to Article 2 of the sales contract in this case, the date of completion of the pre-sale agreement shall be August 2002, and when the above date has passed, it shall be deemed that the pre-sale right holder's declaration of intention to complete the

2. On August 2002, when the date of the completion of the contract between the Plaintiff and the Defendant as to the land in this case, the Plaintiff’s cause of the claim and the date of the completion of the contract, the Plaintiff entered into a trade reservation with the content that the contract is completed as a matter of course, even if no declaration of intention of the completion of the contract is made, and the Defendant has made the provisional registration of this case to the Plaintiff, as seen earlier. The legal representative of the Plaintiff paid the amount to the Defendant prior to the date of the pre-sale agreement is not in dispute.

Therefore, barring special circumstances, on August 31, 2002, the Plaintiff’s right to claim for ownership transfer registration based on the completion date of the instant provisional registration against the Defendant based on the provisional registration of this case, on August 31, 2002, which was determined as the date of completion of the instant trade reservation.

I would like to say.

3. Defendant’s defense

A. The Defendant asserts that, around 2006, under the Plaintiff’s legal representative B and oral agreement, the Defendant agreed to waive the Plaintiff’s right to request the principal registration of the instant land instead of giving up the Plaintiff and B a gift of 3,350 square meters in Pyeongtaek-siF forest.

(b).