1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

1. The following facts are not disputed, or may be acknowledged in light of the purport of Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 2 and all pleadings:

As to the instant real estate, A (hereinafter referred to as “A”) completed each of the instant registrations, such as the entries in the purport of the claim, to the Defendant.

B. On November 25, 2014, the District Court: (a) commenced rehabilitation procedures against A on November 25, 2014 as 2014 Gohap507 and appointed B as a custodian; (b) on August 21, 2015, the said court decided to abolish the rehabilitation procedures.

A again filed an application for commencement of rehabilitation proceedings with Seoul Central District Court 2015 Ma100243. On October 28, 2015, the above court rendered a decision to regard A representative director of the above company as a custodian at the time of rendering a decision to commence rehabilitation proceedings on October 28, 2015, and A’s administrator first taken over the instant lawsuit.

(2) The Defendant’s assertion is not only a claim against A, but also a debt exceeding the amount of the claim even if there is no claim against the Plaintiff.

However, each of the registrations of this case is completed in collusion with D who was the representative director of A, by pretending to have concluded a sales contract or security agreement for transfer of each of the instant real estate.

Therefore, each of the registrations in the name of the defendant in this case must be cancelled as a ground invalidation.

3. Determination

A. In the event that the establishment registration of a neighboring real estate or the registration of ownership transfer is completed, the registration is presumed to have been completed lawfully in the cause and procedure, and it is presumed that the title holder is presumed to have acquired ownership in accordance with legitimate cause of registration as well as in respect of the third party.

Therefore, the plaintiff asserts that the title holder of each registration of this case is the defendant, and barring any special circumstance, the registration is null and void.