The plaintiff's appeal and the conjunctive claim added by this court are all dismissed.

after the filing of an appeal.

1. 사안의 개요 이 사건은 망 C의 딸인 원고가 망인 소유이던 별지 목록 기재 각 부동산(이하 ‘이 사건 각 부동산’이라 한다)에 관한 망인의 처남댁인 피고 명의의 소유권이전등기는 피고가 남편과 공모하여 등기서류를 위조하여 이루어졌거나, 망인이 F에게 이 사건 각 부동산을 증여한 후 증여세 포탈 등의 목적으로 망인과 F, 피고가 공모하여 피고 앞으로 등기부상 소유명의를 신탁한 통정허위표시 또는 명의신탁 약정에 기한 것으로서 원인무효라고 주장하면서, 피고에 대하여 소유권이전등기의 말소등기절차 이행을 구한 사안이다.

The first instance court dismissed the plaintiff's claim, and the plaintiff appealed against it.

The Plaintiff changed the previous claim to the primary claim by the court, and added the amount equivalent to the Plaintiff’s share of inheritance (11,11,111) and the amount to be returned (43,274,006 won) to the Defendant, among the purchase price claims for each of the instant real estate against the deceased, to the legal reserve of inheritance (43,274,0

2. The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance concerning this case is that the plaintiff's assertion that the registration of ownership transfer in the name of the defendant was made through forgery, false conspiracy, or title trust agreement as evidence submitted to the court of first instance is insufficient to recognize that the registration of ownership transfer in the name of the defendant was made through forgery, false conspiracy, or title trust agreement. The court's reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance is as stated in the judgment of the court of first instance, except for the determination of the following three paragraphs

3. Judgment on the conjunctive claim added by this Court

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion 1 did not have paid KRW 500 million to the Deceased, and on March 1, 2012, the Deceased’s claim for the purchase price against the Defendant was inherited to co-inheritors.

Therefore, it is true.