1. The plaintiff's action against the defendant B and D shall be dismissed.

2. As to the Plaintiff, Defendant C shall be liable to the Plaintiff for the payment of 149 square meters in Gyeongsan-si E.

1. Determination as to the claim against Defendant C

A. On January 6, 1990, on the part of Defendant B sold the instant land and the instant building attached thereto, G GJ 235 square meters and the unregistered building on its ground. Accordingly, the registration of ownership transfer was completed on the said G land to Defendant B. However, following the instant land’s answer, Defendant B did not complete the registration of ownership transfer on the instant land, but completed the registration of ownership transfer on the instant land to Defendant B, who is not qualified as farmland acquisition.

After that, on November 24, 1990, Defendant B sold each of the above real estate to Defendant C, and Defendant C sold each of the above real estate to the Plaintiff on February 18, 1996.

On the other hand, Defendant D, as the heir of the networkF, succeeded to the land of this case by an agreement division.

Therefore, Defendant C is obligated to implement the registration procedure for transfer of ownership on February 18, 1996 with respect to the instant land to the Plaintiff.

(b) Grounds: Judgment based on the recommendation of confession (Article 208 (3) 2 and Article 150 (3) of the Civil Procedure Act);

2. Determination as to the claim against Defendant B and D

A. On January 6, 1990, the Plaintiff’s assertion 1 of the parties concerned sold to Defendant B the instant land and the instant building attached thereto, G G 235 square meters, and the unregistered building on the said land. Accordingly, the registration of ownership transfer was completed with respect to the said G land. However, the instant land was correct, and the registration of ownership transfer was completed with respect to the instant land to Defendant B, who was not qualified as farmland acquisition, but the registration of ownership transfer was completed with respect to the instant land.

After that, on November 24, 1990, Defendant B sold each of the above real estate to Defendant C, and Defendant C sold each of the above real estate to the Plaintiff on February 18, 1996.

On the other hand, Defendant D, as the heir of the networkF, succeeded to the land of this case by an agreement division.

Therefore, the Plaintiff’s subrogation of Defendant B and C in succession to Defendant D on this case’s land.