1. As to the size of 1,154 square meters prior to Chungcheongnam-si, ① the sales contract concluded on June 24, 2014 between the Defendant and C shall be revoked, and ②.

1. Under the provision of Article 150(1) of the Civil Procedure Act, the basic facts recorded in the separate sheet among the facts constituting the cause of the instant claim that the Plaintiff made, may be acknowledged by adding to the whole purport of the pleadings, either the Defendant is deemed to have led to the confession, or the entire purport of the pleadings, either A 1-7 (including each number).

2. Determination on both arguments

A. According to the facts acknowledged earlier, barring any special circumstance, the Plaintiff’s assertion seeking revocation of the fraudulent act and reinstatement therefrom is justifiable, as the sales contract concluded between the Defendant and C on the instant real estate constitutes a fraudulent act in relation to the Plaintiff.

B. As to this, the defendant argued to the effect that he was the so-called " bona fide beneficiary" at the time of concluding a sales contract for the real estate of this case with C, but some of the testimony of the witness C as shown in support is difficult to believe it as it is, and the testimony of the witness B 1, 2, 3-1, and 3-2 and some of the testimony of the witness C is still insufficient to recognize this point. Since there is no other evidence to acknowledge this, the defendant's internal defense is not acceptable.

3. Accordingly, according to the conclusion, the Plaintiff’s respective claims of this case seeking the implementation of the procedure for the registration of cancellation of ownership transfer registration, which was concluded on June 24, 2014, as well as the cancellation of the sales contract concluded on the instant real estate, as well as the restoration therefrom (return of originals) to its original state, are legitimate, and thus, accept them as they are.