1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

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

1.The following facts do not conflict between the Parties:

On December 30, 1988, the Plaintiff completed the registration of transfer of ownership in its name with respect to the land of Yeongdeungpo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government (hereinafter “instant land”).

B. As to the instant land, on August 29, 201, the provisional disposition prohibiting disposal under the name of the DHousing Reconstruction Project Association was completed, and the said association filed a lawsuit against the Plaintiff for the registration of ownership transfer against the Plaintiff, and the decision of recommending settlement was finalized on February 14, 2013 as follows, while the lawsuit was pending.

The Plaintiff shall receive KRW 209,500,000 from the partnership within seven days from the date of public notice of the approval for the management and disposal plan, and simultaneously implement the procedure for the registration of ownership transfer for the instant land on November 4, 2010 to the partnership, and deliver the instant land.

C. On October 27, 2015, the registration of transfer of ownership in the name of the defendant was completed, and on January 4, 2017, the registration of transfer of ownership in the name of the above union was completed, and on the same day, the above registration of transfer in the name of the defendant was cancelled due to the invalidation of provisional disposition.

2. Judgment on the lawfulness of the lawsuit

A. The Plaintiff asserts that the registration of transfer of ownership in the name of the Defendant was based on the Plaintiff’s act of unauthorized representation, the father’s father, or that the sales contract was unfair or was based on the Defendant’s deception, and sought cancellation of the registration of transfer of ownership against the Defendant.

B. In the course of a lawsuit seeking the implementation of the procedure for registration of cancellation of ownership transfer registration, if the registration of ownership transfer is already cancelled for any other reason, there is no legal interest in seeking the cancellation thereof (see Supreme Court Decision 2004Da50044, Sept. 28, 2005). Since the registration of ownership transfer in the name of the defendant was cancelled due to the cancellation of provisional disposition as a result of the completion of the registration of ownership transfer in the name of the above provisional disposition obligee, there is no legal interest in seeking the cancellation thereof.