1. The plaintiff's claims against the defendants are all dismissed.

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

1. Facts of recognition;

A. As to each real estate listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant real estate”), a certificate of sale was prepared on November 20, 1980 between seller E and buyer E and buyer F. Accordingly, on November 21, 1980, the networkF completed the registration of ownership transfer for each of the instant real estate based on the said sale (hereinafter “instant sales contract”).

B. On January 9, 1981, G completed the provisional registration of the right to claim ownership transfer (hereinafter “the provisional registration of this case”) on the instant real estate on January 8, 1981.

C. On November 13, 1991, the deceased on November 13, 1991, Defendant B, F’s heir, completed the registration of ownership transfer made on August 29, 2006 each of the instant real estate by inheritance.

On September 9, 2002, E died on September 9, 2002, Defendant D, the spouse of E, jointly succeeded to E.

E. G died on November 5, 1990, and the Plaintiff succeeded to G.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 8 and 10, fact inquiry results against the Hongcheon-gun of this court, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion G, while purchasing each of the instant real estate from E, concluded a three-party registration title trust agreement with F with regard to each of the instant real estate, and completed the registration of ownership transfer with respect to each of the instant real estate in the future in the F. Since F’s ownership transfer registration becomes null and void, Defendant B, the seller’s heir, is obligated to perform the registration of cancellation of ownership transfer registration with respect to Defendant C and D, the seller’s heir, and Defendant C and D are obligated to implement the registration of ownership transfer due to sale to the Plaintiff, the heir of G.

나. 피고들의 주장 1) 피고들의 주장 G과 F 사이에 명의신� 약정이 체결된 바 없다. 2) 피고 B의 주장 설령 G과 F 사이에 명의신탁 약정이 체결되었다고 하더라도 이는 계약명의신탁 약정이라고 할...