1. The part of the first instance judgment against Defendant B and Defendant H shall be revoked.

2. Defendant B is the co-defendant C and the first instance court.

1. The key issue of the instant case was: (a) on November 25, 1985, the Plaintiff entered into a title trust agreement between Defendant B and the third party (hereinafter “instant title trust agreement”); and (b) on November 27, 1985, the title trust agreement of this case (hereinafter “instant ownership transfer registration”) was null and void as a violation of the Act on the Registration of Real Estate under Actual Titleholder’s Name (hereinafter “Real Estate Real Name Act”); (c) on the part of the seller, by subrogation of the Defendant F, Defendant G, etc., who succeeded to the ownership of the instant forest from the seller; and (d) on the part of the Plaintiff and the Defendants, who still carried out the ownership transfer registration of the instant forest under the name of the Plaintiff and the Defendants, with respect to the ownership transfer registration of the instant forest.

As to this, Defendant B did not conclude the title trust agreement with the Plaintiff, and rather asserted that the forest of this case was donated from Defendant B’s mother and Defendant B’s mother.

(1) The Plaintiff F and Defendant G only sought dismissal of the Plaintiff’s claim while filing an appeal on the grounds that the Plaintiff did not dispute the instant agreement on title trust between the Plaintiff and the Defendant B, on the grounds that the costs of lawsuit are unreasonable. Therefore, we examine whether the instant agreement on title trust between the Plaintiff and the Defendant B exists.

2. Determination

A. The title trust is established by the agreement between the parties, and this is explicitly and explicitly established, and the determination of whether the title trust was made is based on the fact-finding.