1. The Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) is about the real estate stated in the attached real estate list to the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant).

1. Judgment on the defendant's main defense

A. Although the plaintiff filed a lawsuit in this case with the Suwon District Court, which has jurisdiction over the defendant's domicile, the plaintiff asserted that the lawsuit in this case was unlawful due to the violation of jurisdiction. Thus, the lawsuit in this case may be brought to the court where the real estate is located, and the location of the attached real estate list (hereinafter "the real estate in this case") in the lawsuit in this case is within the jurisdiction of this court, since the plaintiff has jurisdiction over the area where the real estate in this case is located, the plaintiff's assertion is without merit.

B. With respect to the instant lawsuit seeking the implementation of the procedure for ownership transfer registration based on the restoration of real name, as the restoration to the original state for the real estate of this case, for which the Plaintiff had completed the registration of ownership transfer to the Defendant before cancelling the sales contract concluded with the Defendant and cancelling the contract, the Defendant asserts that the Plaintiff’s seeking the ownership transfer registration based on the restoration of real name does not have any interest in the lawsuit, as an exceptional claim.

Therefore, a claim for the registration of ownership transfer for the restoration of the true name shall be allowed in lieu of seeking the cancellation of the registration against the current registered titleholder by the person who has already registered the ownership in his/her future or acquired the ownership in accordance with the law to restore the true name of the registration. According to the evidence No. 1, it can be recognized that the registration of ownership transfer was already made in the name of the plaintiff. Thus, the lawsuit of this case premised on the plaintiff being the true owner is sufficiently beneficial to the lawsuit of this case.