1. All claims filed by the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) and the counterclaim claims filed by the Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) are dismissed.

2...

A principal lawsuit and a counterclaim shall be deemed simultaneously.

1. Basic facts

A. The deceased D (Death on November 2, 2006) is a son of the deceased E (Death on July 6, 2013) and the Defendant is a wife of the network D, and the Defendant is a person who completed the registration of transfer of ownership on the ground of inheritance due to the consultation and division on November 2, 2006, with respect to the 1,090 square meters of the answer 1,090 square meters in South and South Sea-gun.

B. On October 26, 2010, the 1,090 square meters in Gyeongnam-gun, Chungcheongnam-do was divided into 301 square meters in Gyeongnam-gun, Chungcheongnam-do (hereinafter “instant site”) and 789 square meters in F field.

C. The Plaintiff is a legal wife who completed the report of marriage with the deceased E on March 21, 2002, and completed the registration of preservation of ownership in the Plaintiff’s name on November 10, 2010 with respect to the building indicated on the attached property constructed on the instant site (hereinafter “instant building”).

[Ground of Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1-1 to 3, evidence 2-1, 2, 3, 7, 8, 9, Eul evidence 2 (Evidence 1-3 of Evidence 1), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination on the lawfulness of the counterclaim

A. Since the Plaintiff’s defense prior to the merits of this case and the counterclaim are not related to each other, the counterclaim of this case is unlawful as it lacks the relevant litigation requirements.

B. According to the proviso of Article 269(1) of the Civil Procedure Act, a counterclaim must be related to the method of claim or defense of the principal lawsuit.

With respect to the main lawsuit of this case for which the plaintiff sought the execution of the procedure for ownership transfer registration regarding the site of this case to the defendant, the defendant asserted that the defendant lent total of KRW 95,00,000 to the plaintiff the construction cost of the building of this case, and that the above loan and delay damages were claimed as a counterclaim to the court of this case, it is obvious that the counterclaim of this case is not related to the method of claim or defense of the main lawsuit of this case

However, as to the defendant's counterclaim, the plaintiff filed a counterclaim without raising an objection at the first instance court's pleading on October 17, 2014.