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

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

1. The facts of recognition D built an annual house on the land of Jung-gu, Jungyang-gu, Busan-gu, Seoul-si, the Defendant BC owned, and borrowed it from the Plaintiff on the need of the construction fund.

At that time, the Plaintiff demanded security, and Defendant BC issued to the Plaintiff a sales contract for the real estate stated in the attached Form upon D’s request on June 10, 2016.

However, on October 25, 2016, Defendant BC completed the registration of ownership transfer due to the trust contract on the same day on the same day after the registration of ownership transfer was completed in its own name on the real estate in order to obtain a loan from the Ulleung Gun Cooperatives and the Young-gu Northern District Association and to secure its repayment.

[Reasons for Recognition: Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 11819, purport of the whole pleadings]

2. Assertion and determination

A. The Plaintiff’s trust agreement with the Defendants asserting that the agreement is invalid as a false representation in conspiracy.

Even if it is not so, the plaintiff who has the right to claim the registration of ownership transfer of the real estate stated in the attached Form shall terminate the trust contract between the defendants as a copy of the complaint of this case on behalf of the defendant BC.

Therefore, the Defendant New Real Estate Trust Co., Ltd. shall carry out the registration procedure for cancellation of ownership transfer registration to Defendant BC, and Defendant BC shall implement the registration procedure for transfer of ownership based on the sale contract as of June 10, 2016 to the Plaintiff.

B. First of all, there is no evidence that the trust contract between the Defendants is a false declaration of conspiracy, and thus the assertion of false declaration is rejected.

In addition, in order for the plaintiff to terminate the trust contract on behalf of the defendant BC, there must be grounds for termination, and this argument cannot be accepted as there is no proof of the grounds for termination.

After all, the plaintiff is merely a creditor against the defendant BC and cannot oppose the defendant C real estate trust, which is an external owner. Therefore, all of the plaintiff's claims cannot be accepted, and it is so ordered as per Disposition.