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

A. Each of the instant real estates is unregistered.

B. The land cadastre of the real estate in the separate sheet No. 1 (hereinafter “instant real estate”) is indicated as being examined on May 30, 1914, and C is indicated as being examined on May 30, 1914 in the land cadastre of the real estate in the separate sheet No. 2 (hereinafter “instant real estate No. 2”).

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1-1 and 2, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination on this safety defense

A. The lawsuit of this case, for which the plaintiff asserted by the defendant, seeks confirmation of ownership of each real estate of this case, is unlawful as there is no benefit of confirmation.

B. Determination 1) In a case where there is a person who has been registered as an owner in the registry, the land cadastre, or the forest land cadastre, or the forest land cadastre, and in a case where there is a final and conclusive judgment against the nominal owner that the pertinent real estate is owned by the applicant for registration of preservation, the application for registration of preservation of ownership may be filed against the State. As such, the application for confirmation of ownership against the State is unregistered, and there is a benefit in confirmation only in the case where the relevant land is not unregistered, the registrant is unknown or the registrant is unknown on the land cadastre or the forest land cadastre, and where there are special circumstances, such as the State's refusal of ownership by a third party who is the nominal owner and continues to claim state ownership (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 93Da58738, Dec. 2, 194). 2) With respect to the instant case based on the above legal doctrine, the situation title with respect to the instant real estate No. 1, as seen earlier, is indicated “B”, and the situation title holder with respect to each real estate of this case.