beta
Text
1. All appeals by the defendant against the plaintiffs are dismissed.
2. The addition of the plaintiffs' claims to the court of appeal.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. On June 23, 1980, as the defendant, who actually owns 46,711 square meters of F forest land in Haan-gun, Gyeongnam-gun (hereinafter “the instant forest”) and completed the registration of ownership transfer under a title trust in the name of G, the defendant's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's
The sales contract prepared by K as to the forest of this case between K on March 3, 2004 includes 63 million won as the purchase price, and is stated as the special agreement.
B. On May 12, 2004, L, B, C, and Plaintiff D concluded a contract for purchase of forest land of this case with K as sales price of KRW 226,080,000 with respect to the forest land of this case, and the down payment of KRW 25,000,000 on the date of the contract without setting a specific date, the remainder of KRW 201,080,000 on the date of the contract, and the remainder of KRW 201,00,000 on the date of the contract, at the same time as the remainder payment and the payment of all documents related to the registration at the same time as the remainder payment. As a special agreement, the manager determined that the instant forest purchase contract includes the fruit trees, tree group storage, and other sales prices, which are the above land objects, and the current status
At the time of 2004, the officially announced value of the forest of this case is KRW 84,079,800.
C. Accordingly, L and B, Plaintiff C, and Plaintiff D completed the registration of ownership transfer as to each portion of 1/4 of the instant forest land on June 3, 2004, and the Defendant leased the instant forest land where tree is planted, under the condition that KRW 1,170,000 per annum, that the forest land of this case is a 14 million per annum, and H, the Defendant’s children, each month from February 2006 to October 201.