1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. The following facts are found to be without dispute between the parties, or recognized in full view of the descriptions of Gap evidence 1 and 2, Gap evidence 1 and 2, Eul's witness's witness's partial testimony, and the whole purport of the arguments.

A. The plaintiff and the defendant are children of D(s) and their father are different.

B. On April 3, 1984, the Plaintiff, including the Plaintiff’s acquisition of ownership, purchased a building of 129 square meters and its ground (hereinafter “instant real estate”) from Seongbuk-gu Seoul, Seongbuk-gu, Seoul, and purchased the same month.

4. The registration of ownership transfer for the instant real estate was completed due to the above sale.

C. On August 19, 1985, the Plaintiff’s objection and the Defendant’s establishment of the right to collateral security (1) completed the registration of the establishment of the right to collateral security with respect to the instant real estate as “the maximum amount of claims KRW 20 million,” “debtor Plaintiff,” and “the Defendant of the collateral mortgagee.”

(2) The Plaintiff went to the United States around June 198, and the Defendant completed the registration of the establishment of a neighboring mortgage with respect to the instant real estate on June 14, 198, which was around that time, as “the maximum amount of claims KRW 15 million,” “the Plaintiff,” and “the Defendant of the neighboring mortgagee.”

Since the registration of transfer in the future and the disposal of the real estate in this case (1) around October 1996, the defendant requested that the plaintiff and the fifth degree branch of the real estate in this case be entrusted with the title of the real estate in this case, and on October 4, 1996, the ownership transfer registration was completed in the future C on October 4, 196.

(2) On April 30, 2007, C sold the instant real estate in KRW 310 million to G, and on May 16, 2007, the transfer registration for the instant real estate was completed on the grounds of the said sale in G in the future.

2. The assertion and judgment

A. (1) On October 4, 1996, the Plaintiff, as the Plaintiff’s owner, held the title trust of the instant real estate to C. However, the Defendant demanded that C, a title trustee without the Plaintiff’s consent, sold the instant real estate in KRW 310 million, thereby infringing on the Plaintiff’s ownership.