1. The Defendant (Appointed Party) and the designated parties are listed in the separate sheet as to the size of 55 m2,00 square meters prior to C in the city of official residence to the Plaintiff.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On August 14, 1989, the Plaintiff completed the provisional registration of the right to claim ownership transfer (hereinafter “the provisional registration of this case”) on August 10, 1989, on the part of the Defendant (the appointed party; hereinafter the “Defendant”), the appointed party D, and the network E, with respect to the land of this case, which is owned by the Plaintiff, on August 10, 1989, the provisional registration of the right to claim ownership transfer (hereinafter “the provisional registration of this case”).

B. After that, on May 3, 199, the deceased on May 3, 199, the deceased on the part of the deceased on the part of the deceased, G, H, I, and the deceased’s wife and children, K, and L inherited the shares of E. The shares of the Defendant and the Appointors are as shown in the attached list.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 3, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

(a) a right which would have the effect of a trade by declaring the intention of completion of the trade reservation in the unilateral promise, that is, the right to conclude the trade reservation is a kind of right to form and exercise the exercise period between the parties, if any, within such period, and within 10 years from the time of establishment of the reservation, if there is no such an agreement, and upon the expiration of such period, the right to conclude the trade reservation terminates due to the lapse of the exclusion period;

On the other hand, in the exclusion period, the interruption of the period can not be the same as the extinctive prescription.

(1) The Defendant, etc. completed the provisional registration of this case based on the pre-sale agreement on August 10, 1989, pursuant to the facts acknowledged earlier (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2000Da26425, Jan. 10, 2003). Thus, insofar as there is no evidence to deem that the Defendant, etc. exercised the right to complete the pre-sale agreement, it is reasonable to view that the right to complete the pre-sale agreement was extinguished by the lapse of the exclusion period after the lapse of August 10, 199, 100 after the date of the pre-sale agreement.

Therefore, since the provisional registration of this case is the registration of invalidity of cause, the defendant and the designated parties are described in the attached list as to the land of this case.