1. The plaintiff's main claim is dismissed.

2. The defendant is against the plaintiff, Seodaemun-gu Seoul, Seoul, Seoul, 15.

1. On January 26, 1984, the Plaintiff asserts that the land of this case, which the Defendant and D jointly owned one-half shares, was donated by the Defendant and D on January 26, 1984, and filed a registration of transfer with respect to the Defendant’s co-ownership.

The evidence presented by the Plaintiff alone is insufficient to recognize that the Plaintiff received a gift from the Defendant’s co-ownership, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it.

In addition, while there are circumstances in which D’s 1/2 of the instant land transferred to the Plaintiff, the Plaintiff’s assertion that the Plaintiff was omitted only for the registration of the Defendant’s 1/2 of the instant land in light of the following: (a) the grounds for registration were only registered as a sale on January 26, 1984; and (b) there is no specific evidence to deem that the Plaintiff acquired shares on the said registry for reasons different from those of the acquisition of shares on the said registry; and (c) the Plaintiff received the entire donation of the instant land from D and the Defendant around 1984.

2. Comprehensively taking account of the overall purport of arguments as to the conjunctive claim Gap's evidence Nos. 1 and 6 (including each number), it is presumed that as to D's 1/2 co-ownership share in the land of this case, the plaintiff completed the registration of transfer of shares on the ground of sale around January 1984, and thereafter, the plaintiff constructed a reinforced concrete building building on the ground of the fourth and the second underground floors, including the land of this case and completed the registration of preservation of the church building on the fourth unit, such as Seodaemun-gu, Seoul around December 19, 1987, and the above land was incorporated into part of the church site. The plaintiff recognized that from around that time, the plaintiff owned the church building of this case to the ground of this case and occupied it as a co-owned intention pursuant to Article 197(1) of the Civil Act.

Therefore, the Plaintiff acquired the Defendant’s 1/2 co-ownership shares in the instant land from December 19, 1987 to December 20, 2007, after the lapse of about 20 years from around December 19, 207.

Therefore, the defendant shall make the above 1/2 share to the plaintiff.