1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

1. The reasons for the court's explanation concerning this case are as follows: (a) addition of "Evidence A6 or A8" as evidence of insufficient evidence of the third party 8 of the judgment of the court of first instance; and (b) addition of the plaintiff's assertion added in the court of first instance as to the plaintiff's assertion added in the court of first instance as stated in the reasoning of the judgment, and therefore, it shall be quoted in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. As to the Plaintiff’s assertion, the Plaintiff argued that the Defendant’s act of completing the registration of transfer of ownership in this case’s gift agreement or the Defendant’s act of completing the registration of transfer of ownership in this case’s case’s case’s case’s case’s case’s case’s case’s case’s case’s case’s case’s case’s case’s case’s case’s case’s case’s case’s case’s case’s case’s case’s case’s case’s case’s case’s case’s case’s case’s case’s case’s case’s case’s case’s case

Therefore, the plaintiff's above assertion is without merit.

[Plaintiff added the claim in violation of Article 103 of the Civil Code as a preliminary claim, but the subject matter of the claim for cancellation registration is the claim for cancellation registration in question, that is, the cause of the claim that forms the basis for identity identification, that is, the cause of the claim for cancellation registration in question shall be "e.g., invalidation of the cause of registration", and each ground supporting invalidation of the cause of registration is merely an independent attack defense and cannot be deemed to constitute a separate cause of claim (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 97Da54024, Sept. 17, 199). 3. If the plaintiff's claim in this case is decided on March 1, 199, it shall be dismissed as it has no reason, and the judgment of the court of first instance is legitimate as the conclusion.