Of the part against the Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) regarding the main claim of the lower judgment, a request for change of the name of an unauthorized building ledger.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1.(a)

The lower court determined that the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant; hereinafter “Plaintiff”) had a benefit to seek the implementation of the procedure by changing the name of the Plaintiff and the Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff; hereinafter “Defendant”) on the ledger of an unauthorized building building in this case to jointly share the ownership of the ownership of the Plaintiff and the Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff; hereinafter “Defendant”) at the rate of 1/2 shares, on the ground that the instant building, which is an unauthorized building, satisfies the requirements prescribed by the Dongjak-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government Ordinance on Compensation for the Maintenance

B. Review of the reasoning of the first instance judgment as cited by the lower court and the record reveals the following facts.

1) The Plaintiff and the Defendant purchased the instant building on January 11, 2010, and the sales amount of KRW 140,000,000 shall be borne by half and the name of the owner of an unauthorized building ledger is jointly owned (hereinafter “instant investment agreement”).

(2) As the Plaintiff and the Defendant shared the instant building and made it difficult to register it on an unauthorized building ledger, the Defendant prepared a sales contract with the content that the instant building was independently purchased.

The sales contract (Evidence B No. 1) states that "the plaintiff is a joint purchaser with the defendant (50% of shares). However, in the Dongjak-gu Office Housing and the unauthorized House are allowed only in the sole name, it is stated that "the contract shall be executed independently for the purpose of registration of confirmation of unauthorized Building."

C. The Defendant consistently asserted from the first instance court that it is impossible for the Plaintiff to transfer the name of the owner of an unauthorized building register to the joint name of the Plaintiff and the Defendant. The grounds of appeal also conflict with the Seoul Special Metropolitan City Guidelines on the Performance of Works for the Maintenance and Improvement of Unauthorized Building (hereinafter “instant Guidelines”) to change the name of the owner of an unauthorized building register to two joint ownership.