1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Basic facts

A. The plaintiff is three South Korea of the deceased D (hereinafter "the deceased"), and the defendant is one South Korea, and the plaintiff and the defendant are punished by imprisonment.

B. The registration of each ownership transfer was completed in the Defendant’s future on the ground of sale on October 8, 1973, with respect to the area of 2,292 square meters, and the area of 1,722 square meters, which was owned by the Plaintiff, of the Seo-gu District Court Seo-myeon Branch of the Daegu District Court on April 21, 1981, (No. 4465 and No. 4464, which was received on April 21, 1981).

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 4, purport of whole pleadings

2. The plaintiff's assertion and judgment

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion on January 1, 1973: (a) purchased KRW 4,200,000 and sold KRW 2,000,00 to the Defendant, who is the Plaintiff’s punishment, around November 1, 1975, the purchase price of KRW 2,292 square meters, KRW 1,722 square meters prior to C, KRW 524 square meters of F site, and KRW 265 square meters of G cemetery (hereinafter “each of the instant lands”); and (b) sold KRW 2,00,000 of the purchase price to the Defendant.

(hereinafter “the sales of this case.” However, the Defendant, who was the mother, had the mother, supported the deceased’s support and carried out his funeral work, and the Defendant, on the wind that did not support the deceased, maintained his livelihood with the help of the Plaintiff and the H.

Therefore, the Defendant violated the terms and conditions of the instant sales contract, and thus, the Plaintiff is obligated to perform the procedure for the registration of ownership transfer with respect to the area of 1,722 square meters of land in each of the instant land.

B. Ultimately, the Plaintiff’s assertion appears to the purport that the Defendant’s non-support of the Deceased was a condition subsequent to the termination of the validity of the instant sales contract. Therefore, in the case of a juristic act subject to rescission, the Plaintiff bears the burden of proving that both the existence of the condition of rescission and the fulfillment of the said condition have the burden of proof against the claimant of the extinction of the legal act.

However, on October 8, 1973, the Defendant purchased from the Plaintiff the area of 2,292 square meters, and the area of 1,722 square meters, which is the remainder of each of the instant lands.