A. With respect to shares of 2/15 each to Plaintiffs A, B, C, D, E, and F.

(a) “Yinju-gun first group 4 E.W. M.W. 1st group” is for 8 years in Taiwan (S., 1919);

4. 30. The J having the same address was under the circumstances.

The above J shall be 4 years in 1915

6.1. The circumstances were also taken place “Seoul-gun, Gangwon-gun, Seoul-gun, 212 square meters.”

B. The plaintiffs' prior L had a permanent domicile in Gyeonggi-gun M, and died on March 15, 1959.

C. The “Yinju-gun No. 4 before the Gyeonggi-gun H” as indicated in the foregoing paragraph (a) became a “1,388 square meters of HH forests and fields” (hereinafter “the land in this case”) following the conversion of the area by unit, administrative district change, etc. after the land was pointed out as forests and fields.

As to the land of this case, the Defendant completed the registration of ownership preservation by the Suwon District Court No. 13393, Dec. 11, 1986 as to the land of this case.

“The original land of this case” (hereinafter “the original land of this case”) was newly registered on February 1, 1974, and the Defendant completed the registration of ownership preservation on the original land of this case as the registration of the original land of Chuncheon District Court and the receipt of No. 27274 on September 17, 191.

E. The relationship between the above L and the plaintiffs is as shown in the separate sheet.

With respect to L’s property, Plaintiff A, C, D, E, and F respectively succeeded to 2/15, and Plaintiff G succeeded to 3/15.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 4 (including each number), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination as to the land of leisure in this case

A. In full view of the following circumstances that can be seen by comprehensively taking into account the facts of the determination as to the cause of the claim and the fact-finding results on N pages, namely, the fact-finding names of the instant leisure land and the Chinese characters of L who are the plaintiffs’ preference, and the address of J, who is the circumstance-finding, is equal to the legal domicile of L which is the plaintiffs' preference, and the person with the same name other than L which is the plaintiffs' preference, is not identified in the above P Ri. In full view of the following circumstances, the situation-finding names of the instant leisure land and the plaintiffs' preference are the same.

The leisure of this case.