1. The plaintiff (appointed party)'s appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff (Appointed Party).

1. Basic facts

A. On December 5, 2012, the F-Dong Pdong (hereinafter “P-dong”) F-dong, Gwangju Metropolitan City (hereinafter “P-dong”) was divided into one thousand square meters, one hundred and twenty-one square meters, one of which was divided into five hundred and twenty-one square meters, one of which was five hundred and twenty-one square meters, three hundred and twenty-one square meters, one of which was three hundred and twenty-one square meters, one of which was divided into the instant land.

(See Attached Form 2). (b)

The status of ownership change before the subdivision of the land before the subdivision shall be as specified in the following table:

A person who is marked with a thickness is the owner at the time of division.

The first owner G 8/1005/100 of 8/1005/100 of 444/1005/39, August 19, 1983 as of August 19, 1994 as of August 19, 1994; the owner HIJ Appointor D Defendant on February 22, 1995 as of the date of the change of the owner’s G Plaintiff (Appointed Party) on February 3, 1998 as of February 3, 1998.

C. O land was acquired through consultation with the Dong-gu Office of Gwangju on September 24, 2013.

H on March 31, 2016, sold 8/100 of the instant land to Q, and accordingly the registration of ownership transfer in Q was completed.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, Gap evidence 2-1 to 4, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The plaintiff (appointed party)'s assertion and judgment

A. The Plaintiff (Appointed Party) and the designated parties asserted by the Plaintiff (Appointed Party) are sectional owners of 26 square meters of the instant land and the O land (the former part of the area prior to accommodation was “site”), whereas (the shares of the Plaintiff (Appointed Party): shares of the Appointed Party E: shares of the Appointed Party E = 44: 22: 39), and the Defendant did not have the right to the instant land.

[Immediate, the defendant is only the owner of M, N, and F (which was after the division). Accordingly, the plaintiff (appointed party) and the appointed party will terminate the title trust with the defendant by serving a copy of the complaint of this case.

Therefore, among the land in this case, the Defendant’s share 374/1005 to the Plaintiff (Appointed Party), 331/1005 shares to the Selection, and 187/1005 shares to the Selection E, respectively, due to the termination of the title trust as of June 10, 2016.