1. The Defendant received on November 27, 2008 from the Plaintiff each land indicated in the separate sheet from the Daegu District Court.

1. Basic facts (the fact that there is no dispute)

A. On September 16, 2008, the provisional registration of the right to claim transfer of ownership (hereinafter “the provisional registration of this case”) was completed on September 12, 2008 on September 16, 2008 with respect to the land of 17,717 square meters in Nam-gu, Nam-gu, Seoul Special Metropolitan City (hereinafter “land before subdivision”).

B. On November 27, 2008, on the basis of the provisional registration of this case with respect to the land before subdivision, the ownership transfer registration entered in the order was made on November 26, 2008 (hereinafter “instant ownership transfer registration”) on the ground of sale on November 26, 2008.

C. Around April 30, 2008, the registration of the establishment of a mortgage and the registration of the creation of a superficies (hereinafter “registration of the establishment of a superficies”) have been completed regarding the land before subdivision. The Defendant paid KRW 20,1350,000 to D on December 18, 2008, and cancelled the registration of the establishment of a superficies and the registration of the creation of a superficies on the ground of the termination date.

After dividing the land before division into each land listed in the separate sheet during the proceeding of the instant lawsuit, the Defendant sold the land listed in the separate sheet 2, 3, 4, and (5) among them to the gold Exchange Real Estate Co., Ltd. on March 8, 2012, and completed the registration of ownership transfer in the future.

2. Judgment on the main argument

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion 1) The Defendant forged a sales contract, etc. to complete the registration of transfer of ownership of this case (i.e., the Plaintiff entered into a false sales contract in collusion with the Defendant to evade debts, etc., and completed the registration of transfer of ownership of this case on the grounds thereof.

(B) B. 3) Since the ownership transfer registration of this case is null and void, the Defendant is obligated to implement the procedure for cancelling the ownership transfer registration of this case to the Plaintiff. (b) 1) There is no evidence to acknowledge that the Defendant’s judgment on the ownership transfer of this case is completed by forging a sales contract, etc.

2..