1. The plaintiff's appeal is all dismissed.

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

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

Basic Facts

Around March 2, 2012, the plaintiff (J representative director) and the defendant C, the representative of the defendant B, entered into an agreement with the defendant B to pay 50% of the officially announced value of the non-party land by selling the non-party land to the defendant, instead of the plaintiff's share of all the costs and registration costs of the land return lawsuit and the total registration costs in relation to the non-party land in J, J, M, N,O, P, Q, Q, R, S, and T 10 lots (hereinafter "non-party land").

On May 25, 2012, Defendant B filed a lawsuit against Jincheon-gun for the cancellation of the ownership transfer registration in the name of Jincheon-gun on the non-party’s land, and was sentenced to a judgment accepting Defendant B’s claim on April 4, 2014.

(Cheongju District Court Decision 2012Kadan14326). Accordingly, during the continuation of the case, Cheongju District Court 2014Na10619, the compulsory mediation was established on April 1, 2015 to accept most of the claims of Defendant B between Defendant B and Jincheon-gun.

On April 30, 2015, Defendant B appears to have agreed on the agenda entrusted to Defendant C with all acts concerning the preservation and management of ownership of, and disposal of, village property including the subject matter to be selected by Defendant C and the non-party land as a settlement (40 persons are present at the meeting).

After that, on June 18, 2015, Defendant B cancelled the registration of transfer of ownership in the name of Jincheon-gun with respect to the non-party land on the ground of the above compulsory adjustment, and completed the registration of transfer of ownership to U (L) on May 31, 2015 on the same day.

In order to restore the title of ownership transferred to Jincheon-gun on August 6, 2016 to Jincheon-gun, Jincheon-gun, J, G, and H 11 lots (hereinafter “instant land”) around August 6, 2016, Defendant B, in the course of a meeting, agreement, and lawsuit concerning the instant land, and the agenda entrusted to Defendant C with the handling of such litigation affairs, shall be 66 households from among 80 households, and shall be the only place.