1. All appeals filed by Plaintiff (Appointed Party) D, Plaintiff F, and G are dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal are assessed against the Plaintiff (Appointed Party) D.

1. The court's explanation on this part of the basic facts is identical to the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, and thus, citing it as it is in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. The plaintiffs' assertion and judgment

A. The gist of the Plaintiffs’ assertion was that the Defendant purchased the instant secondary-use housing in the state of land scheduled for replotting. At the time of replotting, the Plaintiffs were sold on the condition that the registration of the defective tenement house is made.

On the other hand, the defendant completed the share transfer registration based on the sale on January 20, 1980 as of January 19, 2005, which was received on January 19, 2009 from the Incheon District Court Branch for the 5232.5/20380 shares among the J land of this case (hereinafter “share transfer registration”), and the above share transfer registration was unlawful.

Therefore, the Plaintiffs, as part of the co-owners of the instant J land, seek the cancellation of the instant share transfer registration by the act of preserving the instant J land, or seek the cancellation of the instant share transfer registration by the act of preserving the site of the instant re-owned housing as part of the co-owners of the instant re-owned housing as part of the sectional owners of the instant re-owned housing.

B. Determination 1) In order for the plaintiffs to seek cancellation of the share transfer registration completed in the name of the defendant as part of the exercise of the claim for exclusion of interference with the ownership of the J land in this case, the plaintiffs must first actively assert and prove that they have the right to claim cancellation of the share transfer registration. If it is not recognized that there is such right to the plaintiff, the plaintiff cannot accept the plaintiff's claim even if the registration of invalidity is to be cancelled (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 98Da17831, Feb. 26, 199; 2004Da5044, Sept. 28, 2005; 2004Da5044, Sept. 28, 2005). Therefore, whether the plaintiffs are entitled to seek cancellation of the share transfer registration in this case, including the plaintiffs.