소유권이전등기
1. The plaintiffs' claims against the defendants are all dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiffs.
1. The following facts may be found either in dispute between the parties or in full view of the respective entries and arguments set forth in Gap evidence 1 to 3, 8, and 9 (including paper numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply).
Attached Form
Each land entered in the list (hereinafter referred to as "each land of this case") is currently the transfer of ownership in the name of the net K (1924).
B. Plaintiff A is the wife of the deceased L (MM, Death on November 7, 2005) and Plaintiff B, C, D, and E are the children of the deceased L.
On the other hand, Defendant F is the wife of the network N (Os, and death of May 6, 198) of the network K, and Defendant G, H, I, and J are children of the network N.
B. Around June 22, 2011, Defendant G, the deceased N’s female, reported the death of the deceased K, a father (the date and time of the death was reported on June 13, 1979). Around June 30, 2011, Defendant G requested for adjudication of disappearance on P, the head of Macheon District Court’s Seocho Branch of the Chuncheon District Court, and the said court declared the declaration of disappearance on February 15, 2013.
(2011 Rayman 115). 2. Determination of the cause of action
A. The gist of the plaintiffs' claims is as follows: (a) around September 1, 1979, after the deceased of the network K, purchased each land of this case from 200,000 won from her son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son
B. The reasoning of the judgment is insufficient to deem that the net N occupied each of the instant lands for the period of 20 years from September 1, 1979 to 20 years, and there is no evidence to support otherwise that the net N occupied each of the instant lands for 20 years, and the Plaintiffs’ assertion is without merit.
3. Thus, the plaintiffs' claims against the defendants are without merit.