1. The plaintiff's appeal is 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.

1. The court's explanation on this part of the facts of recognition is the same as the part of "1. Facts of recognition" among the grounds of the judgment of the court of first instance. Thus, this part is cited by the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. The party's assertion and judgment as to it

A. 1) The Plaintiff succeeded to 3/10 of the instant building upon the deceased’s death and the deceased’s death. The instant report on the renunciation of inheritance is null and void since it was known to the Plaintiff and the deceased. As such, the Defendant is obligated to implement the registration procedure for the transfer of ownership on the ground of the restoration of the authentic name with respect to 3/10 of the instant building. 2) After the deceased’s death, the Plaintiff independently succeeded to the instant building by the instant report on the renunciation of inheritance after the deceased’s death, and the Defendant solely owned the instant building through the agreement on the division of inherited property between the deceased’s heir after the deceased’s death. Thus, the Plaintiff’s claim is unreasonable.

In addition, since the defendant completed the prescription period for acquisition of the registry as to the building of this case, it cannot be said that there is any defect in the defendant's registration for transfer of ownership

The defendant's claim that the registration of transfer of ownership is consistent with the substantive relations can be understood as a pre-registration.

B. The plaintiff is not aware of the plaintiff and the deceased E's refusal report of succession of this case, and the plaintiff and the deceased E are not aware of the plaintiff and the deceased, and the claim of this case was filed in the premise that it is null and void, but it is not sufficient to deem that the refusal report of succession of this case was null and void on the sole basis of the statements in the evidence Nos. 1 and 8

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim based on the premise that the report of renunciation of inheritance in this case is null and void is without merit.

3. Conclusion, the plaintiff's claim of this case shall be dismissed as it is without merit.