1. With respect to one-half share of D 2,763 square meters in a permanent address:

A. Defendant B shall stay at the Daegu District Court to Defendant C.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. At the time of residence, Defendant C owned the 2,763m2 (hereinafter “instant land”).

B. On January 24, 2013, Defendant C completed the registration of ownership transfer for the reason of sale on January 10, 2013, as the receipt of No. 1724, Jan. 24, 2013, with respect to the instant land to Defendant B.

At this time, the purchase price paid to Defendant C was borne by both the Plaintiff and Defendant B, the Plaintiff’s punishment, one-half each.

C. Meanwhile, around August 1, 2017, Defendant B filed a lawsuit claiming return of unjust enrichment equivalent to the rent for the area of 1/2 of the instant land, on the other hand, against the Plaintiff, even though the Plaintiff and Defendant B bear 1/2 of the cost, and purchased the instant land and have 1/2 of the share, and the Plaintiff independently uses it.

(Court) On January 15, 2018, in the above case, the judgment dismissing Defendant B’s claim on the ground that it is difficult to recognize Defendant B’s obligation to pay rent by deeming that the Plaintiff and Defendant B concluded a loan agreement for use.

[Reasons for Recognition] Defendant C: The fact that there is no dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 3, and 7, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Claim against Defendant C

A. On January 10, 2013, the Plaintiff and Defendant B purchased 1/2 shares of the instant land from Defendant C, respectively, but the Plaintiff entrusted his name to Defendant B.

Therefore, Defendant B’s registration of shares held in title by the Plaintiff is null and void, and Defendant C is obligated to implement the registration procedure for transfer of ownership of the said shares in accordance with the sales contract to the Plaintiff.

(b) Applicable provisions of Acts: Judgment on deemed confession (Article 208 (3) 2 and Article 150 (3) of the Civil Procedure Act);

3. Claim against the defendant B

A. Defendant B’s claim against the Plaintiff that Defendant B confirmed that the instant land was owned by the Plaintiff in this Court case No. 2018Gadan6494.