1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Facts of recognition

A. On April 15, 1999, the Defendants drafted an undertaking with the following content (hereinafter “instant undertaking”).

1. The address of land where the object is located: Former taxpayer E: Two persons, including B;

2. At the time of the consultation or division with respect to the land above, I promise to jointly register the land above, including two taxpayers and A.

B. On February 10, 1999, the Plaintiff owned F with respect to the area of 2,608 square meters prior to E in Jeju Island (hereinafter “instant land”). On February 5, 1992, the registration of ownership transfer was completed due to the gift under the Defendants’ name.

C. The death of F, the Defendants, the husband, and the Plaintiff, etc., succeeded to the inheritance of 10 South Korea. G died on July 17, 2015.

[Grounds for recognition] In light of the above facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 2 (including additional numbers), Gap evidence Nos. 3 (a letter of promise, it is acknowledged that the following unmanneds after the defendant Eul's name are identical to the above defendant's unmanneds, and thus the authenticity of the entire document is presumed to have been formed as a whole), Eul's each statement of Nos. 1 and 3, and the whole argument's ground for claim as a whole, the defendants can recognize the facts that the plaintiff agreed to share the land of this case with the plaintiff while preparing the letter of promise of this case. Thus, barring special circumstances, the defendants are obligated to implement the registration procedure for transfer of ownership on April 15, 199 with respect to each one-half portion of the land of this case to the plaintiff.

The Defendants 1, B, and C’s assertion that the determination of the Defendants’ assertion is null and void is made on the part of the Plaintiff, not on the part of the Plaintiff, and therefore, they asserted that the instant commitment is null and void. As seen earlier, it is clearly stated that the Plaintiff will be registered on the instant commitment as seen earlier. In light of the fact that the agreement was made in order with time intervals between the parties, the validity of the agreement is valid.