1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the plaintiffs regarding the conjunctive claim that orders payment below shall be revoked.

2...

1. Under the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act, part of the grounds for the judgment of the court of first instance citing part of the judgment of the court of first instance cite the same.

2. Judgment on the main claim

A. A. Around December 15, 1990 when the registration of ownership transfer was made under the name of the Defendant on the instant real estate alleged by the Plaintiffs, the Defendant did not have sufficient means to purchase the instant real estate. Rather, in light of the fact that the right to collateral security was established with respect to the land owned by the deceased, the mortgagee, the Deceased, and the maximum debt amount of KRW 9,900,00 for each of the instant four parcels, the Defendant trusted the title trust to the Defendant, South-Nam, while purchasing the instant real estate from S. by lending the funds to purchase the instant real estate.

In addition, around August 2003 and around September 2009, the Deceased sold real estate owned by the Deceased and lent KRW 270,000 to the Defendant.

Therefore, the instant real estate and the instant loans constitute the deceased’s inherited property. The Plaintiffs, co-inheritors, as co-inheritors, seek the performance of the procedure for ownership transfer registration of 1/5 shares out of the instant real estate, and the payment of KRW 54,00,000, equivalent to 1/5 of the said loans.

B. Determination 1) Since a person who is registered as an owner of real estate is presumed to have acquired ownership through legitimate procedures and causes, the fact that the registration was based on title trust has the burden of proof against the claimant (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2007Da90883, Apr. 24, 2008). The evidence submitted by the plaintiff, including evidence Nos. 8 through 11, and evidence Nos. 22 and 25, and testimony of the witness K of the court below, and the circumstance alone is insufficient to recognize that the registration was based on title trust and that the registration of ownership transfer under the name of the defendant as to the real estate of this case was based on title trust. 2) As to whether the deceased lent the real estate sale price of KRW 270,00,000 to the defendant, there is evidence No. 14.