1. The lawsuit of this case shall be dismissed.

2. The costs of retrial shall be borne by the plaintiff.

purport, purport, ..

1. Following the conclusion of the judgment subject to a retrial is apparent or obvious in records in this court.

The Plaintiff sought implementation of the procedure for cancellation of ownership transfer registration by asserting that, around May 8, 2001, the registration of ownership transfer was completed in accordance with the Act on Special Measures for the Registration, etc. of Ownership, etc., by using a false or forged guarantee, although the Plaintiff did not receive any donation of each real estate listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant real estate”) from Defendant B, as the head of Daegu District Court Decision 2010Ga424, and Defendant B around the first place against Defendant B, the Plaintiff sought implementation of the procedure for the registration of ownership transfer based on the completion of prescription, asserting that the Plaintiff acquired each of the instant real estate as of May 2, 2001 by prescription, and that the transfer of ownership in the name of Defendant C as to the instant real estate was invalid or that it was owned by the Plaintiff in violation of the agreement between the Plaintiff and the first place. The Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the Defendant B and the first place court dismissed the Plaintiff’s claim against the Defendant B against the Defendant.

B. Accordingly, the Plaintiff appealed to the Daegu District Court Decision 201Na7596, but the said court rendered a judgment subject to a retrial that all of the Plaintiff’s appeals was dismissed on November 11, 201, and the Plaintiff was served with the certified copy of the judgment subject to a retrial on November 17, 201.

C. The Plaintiff appealed and appealed by Supreme Court Decision 201Da104987, but the Plaintiff was dismissed by a judgment of non-trial trial on February 9, 2012, and the said judgment was rendered to the Plaintiff on February 13, 2012.