1. The Defendants are with respect to each share indicated in the attached Table with respect to the Plaintiff with respect to 243 square meters in Gangwon-gun, Gangwon-do.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. N owns 2,457 square meters (hereinafter “instant land before the instant subdivision”) prior to the subdivision of the Gangwon-gun, Gangwon-do. Since around 1962, N sold part of the said land to a third party by specifying the location and size of the said land.

B. Since April 3, 1974, the land prior to the instant partition was divided into the land parcel on the land parcel sold with a specific specification on the land cadastre. However, since the registration payment was made around April 16, 1993, it was divided into several parcels, including P, 578 square meters, and was divided into a number of lots, including 274 square meters, after a land category change was made on April 16, 1993, and was divided into a large number of lots, including Ma large-scale 274 square meters, and a large-scale 243 square meters on March 30, 206 (hereinafter “instant land”).

C. Around March 5, 1980, the Plaintiff purchased the instant land from T and U via T, R, and S, and completed the registration of transfer on July 22, 198. However, on the ground that the said land was not divided into injury at the time of purchase, the Plaintiff filed a registration of transfer of co-ownership corresponding to the area of each of the said lands for convenience.

After the purchase of the instant land, the Plaintiff occupies and uses the land as a site by specifying the boundary between the remaining land before subdivision and the land before subdivision. The Defendants also purchased the remaining land before subdivision by specifying each purchase or pre-sale, but owned the land as a co-ownership with the Plaintiff on the same ground as the Plaintiff

[Reasons for Recognition] Defendant 1 through 8, 10, 11: Statement of Confession (Article 150(3) of the Civil Procedure Act) o Defendant 9: Each of the evidence Nos. 1 through 5 (including each number), and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. According to the above facts of recognition, the plaintiff and the defendants are in a mutual title trust relationship with respect to the land of this case, which is dividedly owned.

Therefore, the above title trust relationship was terminated upon the arrival of a copy of the complaint of this case against the Defendants, for which the Plaintiff seeks the termination against the Defendants.

As such, it can be seen.