1. The defendant is based on the restoration of the real name with respect to the real name of 50 square meters in Dongjak-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government to the plaintiff.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff was the owner of the original Dongjak-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government D land (hereinafter “Seoul Metropolitan Government D land before subdivision”). Around September 8, 2003, the Plaintiff prepared a sales contract stating that the purchase price of 49.6/1,174 shares of the land before subdivision shall be KRW 19,70,000 and completed the registration of ownership transfer to the Defendant.

On the same day, the Plaintiff sold some of the shares of the land before subdivision to Defendant and 15 others, and completed the registration of ownership transfer.

B. 17 members, including the plaintiff and the defendant, were under conciliation proceedings (2004 money 116) with respect to the land before partition. On April 12, 2004, the conciliation was established as to the partition of co-owned property as to the above co-owned property, because the Dongjak-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government 50m2 (hereinafter “instant real property”) among the land before partition belongs to the defendant.

C. Around May 4, 2004, the land before subdivision was divided into several lots of land, such as the instant real estate, and the Defendant completed the registration of ownership transfer as to the instant real estate due to the partition of co-owned property on or around May 6, 2004.

[Ground of recognition] The fact that there is no dispute, entry of Gap's 1 through 5, purport of whole pleading

2. The assertion and judgment

A. After the Plaintiff alleged the Plaintiff’s assertion title trust over part of the land before subdivision to the Defendant, the land before subdivision became the instant real estate by partition of co-owned property. Since title trust between the Plaintiff and the Defendant is null and void, the Defendant is obliged to implement the procedure for ownership transfer registration on the instant real estate due to the restoration of real name.

B. The defendant's assertion that around September 8, 2003, the defendant purchased shares in the real estate of this case from the plaintiff, and even if he received the shares in title trust from the plaintiff, since the transfer of shares by the partition of co-owned property becomes impossible, the plaintiff's claim cannot be complied with.

C. The evidence revealed prior to the recognition of title trust 1, and the evidence set forth in Section 6 to Section A.