1. All of the plaintiff's claims are dismissed.

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

1. According to the statements in Gap evidence Nos. 1 (the same as Eul evidence No. 1) and Gap evidence No. 2, with respect to the land of 22 m2 m2 (hereinafter "the real estate of this case"), the non-party D completed the registration of transfer of ownership on the ground of sale on January 26, 1976, and the defendant completed the registration of transfer of ownership on the ground of sale on January 25, 2007.

2.(a)

As to this, the Plaintiff owned the instant real estate by Nonparty E, E, F to Nonparty G, and G sold the said real estate in succession to the Plaintiff’s deceased father H on November 20, 1972, and H inherited the buyer’s status solely upon the death of around May 20, 1998, the Plaintiff sought against the Defendant the implementation of the procedure for transfer registration of ownership based on the sale on November 20, 1972.

However, even according to the Plaintiff’s assertion, the Plaintiff can only seek against G the implementation of the procedure for ownership transfer registration based on the sale on November 20, 1972, and cannot seek implementation of the procedure for ownership transfer registration based on the sale against the Defendant, who is not a party to a sales contract, not a party to a sales contract.

The plaintiff's assertion of this part is without merit.

B. The plaintiff asserts that he acquired prescription since he occupied the real estate of this case from July 14, 1983 to a housing site, etc.

However, even according to the Plaintiff’s assertion, the Defendant completed the registration of ownership transfer on the instant real estate after July 14, 2003, the period of prescriptive acquisition expires. If so, the Defendant is a new interested person after the completion of prescriptive acquisition, and the Plaintiff cannot assert the completion of prescriptive acquisition against the Defendant.

The plaintiff's assertion on this part is without merit.

3. The plaintiff's claim for conclusion is all dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.