1. All of the plaintiff's claims that are changed in exchange at the trial are dismissed.

2. Any claim that is altered on an exchange basis;

1. The registration of ownership transfer was completed on the ground of sale and purchase as of December 20, 197 on the real estate listed in the separate sheet, which was owned by Suwon District Court C (hereinafter “instant real estate”) as of July 7, 1980, pursuant to the Suwon District Court Young-si Office No. 10361, July 7, 1980.

【Reasons for Recognition】 The descriptions of Evidence Nos. 5 and 6, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Judgment as to the primary cause of claim

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion concluded a title trust agreement with the Defendant on the instant real estate, and the Plaintiff’s female E entered into a sales contract with C on the instant real estate as the Defendant’s representative, and the ownership transfer registration was completed in the future of the Defendant.

The title trust agreement between the Plaintiff and the Defendant is null and void in accordance with the Act on the Registration of Real Estate under Actual Titleholder’s Name (hereinafter “Real Estate Real Name Act”). The seller was unaware of the title trust agreement, and the Defendant finally acquired the ownership of the instant real estate.

Therefore, the Defendant, who is a trustee, unjust enrichment of the instant real estate pursuant to the contract title trust agreement concluded between the Plaintiff and the trustee prior to the enforcement of the Real Estate Real Name

As such, the Plaintiff is obligated to implement the registration procedure for transfer of ownership based on unjust enrichment on the instant real estate.

B. There is no evidence to prove that the Plaintiff and the Defendant concluded a contract title trust agreement with C on the instant real estate and the Defendant concluded a valid contract on the instant real estate with C.

Rather, comprehensively taking account of the overall purport of the arguments as to Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 4, the plaintiff entered into a sales contract with Eul for the real estate of this case and completed only the registration thereof in the future for the defendant. Accordingly, the plaintiff filed a claim against the defendant for cancellation of ownership transfer registration for the real estate of this case on the ground that the title trust agreement with the defendant constitutes three party registered title trust, and filed a claim against C