1. Of the instant petition for retrial, the part on which grounds for retrial under Article 451(1)6 and 7 of the Civil Procedure Act are asserted.

1. The facts below the basic facts are either apparent in the records or obvious to this Court.

The plaintiff purchased each real estate listed in the separate sheet from R (hereinafter referred to as "each real estate of this case") from R, and held title in the title of six clan members, such as Dong T, etc., and thereafter the owner was registered in the name of Dong T, the father of the defendant, due to mistake in the transfer process of the register, and the defendant filed a lawsuit for cancellation of ownership transfer registration (hereinafter referred to as "registration of ownership transfer of this case") on the ground that the registration of ownership transfer in the name of the defendant's sole name, which was completed as a result of inheritance due to consultation division No. 6415 on February 20, 2004 (hereinafter referred to as "registration of ownership transfer of this case") constitutes registration of invalidity of cause.

On August 16, 2006, the court of first instance rendered a judgment in favor of the plaintiff.

B. On July 18, 2007, the Defendant filed an appeal against the judgment of the first instance (Seoul District Court 2015Na5367), and the Gwangju District Court changed the judgment of the first instance to the effect that, upon the Plaintiff’s amendment of the Plaintiff’s purport of the claim, the Defendant shall implement the procedure for registration of cancellation of the ownership transfer registration of this case as to each of the 5/6 shares (excluding the portion of the network T shares) of each of the instant real estate, the cause of which is null and void, and the Defendant issued a judgment to the Plaintiff on May 16, 2004 to implement the procedure for registration of cancellation of the ownership transfer registration of each of the instant real estate (hereinafter “the re-adjudication judgment”).

C. The Defendant appealed against the judgment subject to a retrial (Supreme Court Decision 2007Da56296), and the Supreme Court dismissed the Defendant’s final appeal on October 25, 2007, and the judgment subject to a retrial became final and conclusive as it is.

2. Determination as to the existence of a ground for retrial

A. Defendant’s assertion 1 is a clan that was set up for the judgment subject to a retrial, and the representative of Plaintiff C in the judgment subject to a retrial is actually the representative.