2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiffs.

On October 17, 1962, the registration of ownership transfer was completed on October 19, 1962 on the instant land, which was owned by the original J (Death on October 25, 1965).

B. Meanwhile, on June 12, 2015, K, an son of the above J, died on June 12, 2015. On the other hand, the Plaintiff F, G, and the first deceased son’s wife, Plaintiff C, D, and E, who were the wife of Plaintiff F, G, and the first deceased son’s wife, inherited or inherited K in proportion to their respective inheritance shares listed in the separate sheet as statutory inheritance shares.

2. As to the plaintiffs' assertion, the first owner of the land of this case, sold the above land to the defendant, and the defendant asked K to purchase the above land to a Japanese in around 1974, after which K purchased it again, and thereafter it occupied the above land for over 20 years from the time when K purchased it again and cultivated crops on the ground and occupied the above land on the ground, and died, the defendant, who is the registered titleholder of the above land, is obligated to implement the procedure for ownership transfer registration for the above land as a result of the completion of prescription.

However, it is not sufficient to acknowledge that K occupied the entire land of this case over 20 years with the statement of Gap 3 and 4 and the testimony of witness M alone, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it. Thus, the plaintiffs' assertion is not acceptable.

Furthermore, even if the plaintiffs' assertion was based on the concept of registration, which was a registered titleholder of the instant land, K's Ha, or all of the defendants, the defendant was scheduled to move to Japan at the time of disposing of the said land, and therefore, if K purchased the said land from the defendant, it was immediately registered for relocation at that time.