1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. The registration of ownership transfer was completed on the ground of sale and purchase as of December 20, 197 on the real estate listed in the separate sheet, which was owned by Suwon District Court C (hereinafter “instant real estate”) as of July 7, 1980, pursuant to the Suwon District Court Young-si Office No. 10361, July 7, 1980.

【Reasons for Recognition】 The descriptions of Evidence Nos. 5 and 6, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination as to the cause of action

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion entered into a title trust agreement with the Defendant on the instant real estate, and the Defendant entered into a sales contract with C on the instant real estate, and the ownership transfer registration was completed in the future of the Defendant.

The title trust agreement between the Plaintiff and the Defendant is null and void in accordance with the Act on the Registration of Real Estate under Actual Titleholder’s Name (hereinafter “Real Estate Real Name Act”). The seller was unaware of the title trust agreement, and the Defendant finally acquired the ownership of the instant real estate.

Therefore, the Defendant, as a trustee, unjustly gained the instant real estate from the Plaintiff, pursuant to the contract title trust agreement concluded prior to the enforcement of the Real Estate Real Name Act.

Therefore, the registration procedure for transfer of ownership is obligated to be implemented on the instant real estate due to unjust enrichment return.

B. There is no evidence to prove that the Plaintiff and the Defendant concluded a contract title trust agreement with C on the instant real estate and the Defendant concluded a valid contract on the instant real estate with C.

Rather, comprehensively taking account of the overall purport of the arguments in Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 4, the plaintiff concluded a sales contract with Eul for the real estate of this case and completed only the registration thereof in the future of the defendant. Accordingly, the plaintiff filed a claim against the defendant for cancellation of ownership transfer registration for the real estate of this case on the ground that the title trust agreement with the defendant constitutes three multilateral registered title trust, and filed a claim for cancellation of ownership transfer registration against C on the real estate