1. The plaintiffs' action against the defendant High interest group is dismissed.

2. The plaintiffs' claims against the remaining Defendants.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiffs are the successors of the network AE, and the remainder of the Defendants except the Defendant Goung-gun (hereinafter “Defendant’s successors”) are the successors of the network AF.

B. Although Defendant Goung-gun did not complete the registration of ownership transfer, it did not complete the registration of ownership transfer, even though it did not grant AF the respective land shares listed in the separate sheet No. 1 (hereinafter collectively referred to as “instant real estate”).

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence No. 1-1, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination as to the cause of action

A. Defendant Jari-gun claimed by the Plaintiffs against the deceased AF as a compensation for fishing right, and Defendant J sold the above real estate to the deceased AF’s heir, and AG again sold it to the deceased AE.

Therefore, with respect to the respective inheritance shares of the Defendant’s heir among the instant real estate, the Defendant Goung-gun shall implement the registration procedure for transfer of ownership based on the compensation for fishery rights to the Defendant’s heir, and the Defendant’s heir shall implement the registration procedure for transfer of ownership based on the sale on December 5, 1994 to the Plaintiffs, who are the deceased AE’s heir.

B. 1) As to the claim against the Defendant’s heir, the Plaintiffs sought against the Defendant’s heir the implementation of the procedure for ownership transfer registration for the instant real estate on December 5, 1994. However, there is no evidence to acknowledge that the sales contract was concluded between the Plaintiffs, the network AE and the Defendant’s heir on December 5, 1994 (No. 2 No. 1 (land sales contract) was merely drafted between AG and network AE).

[2] Therefore, we examine the legal nature of the plaintiffs' action against the defendant Goung-gun ex officio.

In a creditor subrogation lawsuit, where the right of the creditor to be compensated by subrogation is not recognized, the creditor himself/herself becomes the plaintiff and the third debtor is the debtor.