1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. The facts subsequent to the facts of recognition do not conflict between the parties, or are recognized by taking account of the overall purport of the arguments in each description of Gap evidence 1, 5, 6, 7, Gap evidence 2-1 (the same as Eul evidence 1) and Eul evidence 2-2 (the same as Eul evidence 4).

A. From September 191, 191, the Defendant began to operate the general restaurant business in the name of macrosi-si C in the name of his birth. The Plaintiff acquired the above business from the Defendant on December 6, 1995 and actually operated the above restaurant until now.

B. The Defendant, on January 22, 2007, completed the registration of transfer of ownership on December 2006, 2006 with respect to one-half of E’s shares among the 188.19 square meters of C, 282.7 square meters of C, 282.7 square meters of a light metal frame and its ground light metal frame, 188.19 square meters of neighborhood living facilities, cement block block, slive roof, slive roof, and six square meters of toilets (hereinafter “instant land and buildings”), thereby becoming a co-owner of the instant land and buildings together with F.

2. Judgment on the plaintiff's assertion

A. On February 15, 2007, the Plaintiff asserted that the Plaintiff purchased one-half of the shares in the Defendant’s instant case from the Defendant at KRW 175 million. On the same day, the Plaintiff paid the Defendant the purchase price in full.

Therefore, according to the above sales contract, the defendant is obligated to implement the registration procedure for transfer of ownership on February 15, 2007 with respect to one half of the shares of the defendant of this case to the plaintiff.

B. In full view of the purport of the entire pleadings in the statement No. 3-1 and No. 2, the Plaintiff paid KRW 175 million to the Defendant on February 15, 2007. However, it is insufficient to recognize the fact that the Plaintiff purchased one-half of the shares in the Defendant’s share from the Defendant solely based on the above fact of recognition.

In addition to the statements 1 and 2 of the evidence Nos. 3-1 and 2, there are statements of evidence Nos. 4 and 13 and testimony of witness G.

However, the statement of Gap evidence No. 4 is the authenticity of the statement.