1. As to the Plaintiff’s share of 1/9 out of the shares of 1,000/12,161 of each real estate listed in the separate sheet.

1. Basic facts

A. On December 19, 1961, the registration of ownership transfer was completed in the name of the Plaintiff’s husband D on December 19, 1961 with respect to C Forest land 40,202 square meters (hereinafter “the instant forest”) in Seopopo-si, Seopo-si, Seopo-si, and on November 7, 1969, the Defendant’s mother was completed on October 10, 1969 on the ground of sale under E’s name.

B. The Defendant’s mother, on November 30, 1979, sold 11,161/12,161 shares in the instant forest (F and G each share of 5,790/12,161 shares, 5,581/12,161 shares, and 5,581/12,161 shares) to F, G, and H, and completed the registration of ownership transfer. Accordingly, E owned the remainder of 1,00/12,161 shares.

C. On May 14, 191, the forest land of this case was divided into each real estate listed in the separate sheet on May 14, 1991, and the cemetery cemetery of Do D’s 1,000 square meters among each real estate listed in the separate sheet is scattered.

The plaintiff is the sole heir of the network D, and the defendant inherited 1/9 of the shares of the network E in each real estate stated in the attached list with the deceased E's father's father.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 3, 5 through 10, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion 1) On October 10, 1969, the Plaintiff’s assertion D sells only the remainder after excluding 1,000 square meters, which accounts for the funeral among the instant forest land, to the network E, and the above 1,000 square meters part of the forest land was trusted in trust to the network E. As such, the registration of shares in the name of the network E is null and void, and the Defendant, who is the deceased E’s heir, is liable for the Plaintiff to implement the registration procedure for ownership transfer registration for shares in 1/9, which are inheritance shares, among each real estate listed in the separate list of the instant forest land divided. 2) The Defendant’s argument E is not entitled to receive title trust from the network D with respect to shares in 1,00/12,161, among the instant forest land. Thus, the Plaintiff’s claim cannot be accepted.

B. As to whether the judgment network D held title trust with respect to the portion of 1,000/12,161 out of the instant forest land to the network E, the Health Unit, No. 2, and No. 2.