1. All of the plaintiff's claims are dismissed.

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

1. The following facts may be found either in dispute between the parties or in accordance with the description of Gap evidence 1, Eul evidence 2, 42, 48, 49 (including each number; hereinafter the same shall apply).

The Defendant owns real estate (hereinafter “the instant building”) listed in the attached Table (hereinafter “instant building”) newly constructed on the ground of Geumcheon-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, Geumcheon-gu, 546.3 square meters (hereinafter “instant site”).

B. On the ground of the instant site, there was a single-story factory, a single-story office, and an underground room owned by the Plaintiff (hereinafter collectively referred to as “previous factory”). However, the Defendant removed the instant building with the Plaintiff’s consent, and constructed a new building from May 21, 2012, and leased the building after completing registration of ownership preservation in the Defendant’s name on January 4, 2013.

C. On November 29, 2011, the Defendant established the right to collateral security, which is a joint collateral, with the maximum debt amount of KRW 900 million on the instant building site and the previous factory, and the Defendant, the Defendant, and the Korean National Bank Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “National Bank”), borrowed the amount of KRW 750 million from the National Bank to use the said money as the construction cost of the instant building. On February 4, 2013, the instant building was provided as the joint collateral of the said right to collateral security.

The plaintiff's child has D and E in addition to the defendant.

2. Determination on the application for ownership transfer registration

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion was sent to the Plaintiff for ownership, and the construction cost was also appropriated for loans secured by the instant building site and the previous factory.

Unlike the plaintiff's intent, the defendant completed the registration of ownership preservation in the name of the defendant, although the defendant obtained a building permit under the defendant's name and promised to register the building in this case.

The Defendant expressed his intention to register the owner of the instant building or ownership in the name of the Plaintiff several times over several occasions, and around January 10, 2013, the Plaintiff, the husband and wife, the Defendant, and the Plaintiff.