The prosecution of this case is dismissed.

1. The summary of the facts charged is the omission of the victim C.

After having left Canada on November 24, 1997 for immigration, the victims had resided in Canada until now, and on November 27, 1998, the mother completed the registration of ownership transfer on the ground of donation from E for the land and building located in Canadian-gu, Chungcheongnam-gu, Seoul (hereinafter referred to as this real estate).

The Defendant was aged, and there is no good health condition such as receiving frequent hospitalization in a convalescent hospital, etc. due to dementia in Mazn's illness, etc., and using the circumstance that the victim did not reside in Korea, the Defendant was willing to acquire the ownership of this real estate after cancelling the registration of ownership transfer of this case by filing a lawsuit against the victim under the name of E to seek cancellation of the registration of ownership transfer of this real estate by using the circumstance that the victim did not reside in Korea.

Around July 1, 2011, the Defendant submitted a complaint to cancel the ownership transfer registration to the public official in charge of the Plaintiff, E, Defendant C, and purport of the claim that “The Defendant shall cancel the donation contract between the Plaintiff and the Defendant, and the Defendant shall implement the procedure for cancellation of the ownership transfer registration of the real estate in this case,” the cause of the claim that “the Defendant shall gather through a lifelong sealing of the Plaintiff, and shall return ownership to the Plaintiff at any time at the time when the purpose of proving the subsequent property relationship is achieved or the Plaintiff’s request is to return ownership. However, the Defendant donated the real estate to the Defendant and completed the ownership transfer registration, but the purpose of proving the property relationship has not been properly sealed, even if the objective of proving the ownership relationship has not been completed, the Defendant did not comply with the Plaintiff’s request for cancellation of ownership transfer registration.” The Defendant stated the place of service of the copy of the complaint as “F in the Dong-gu, Chungcheongnam-gu,, Seoul,” which is the Defendant’s domicile, knowing that the victim had resided in Canada