(a) The F shall be six years, 1917;

3. On February 24, 1936, the registration of ownership preservation was completed on the assessment of land G in Changwon-si, Changwon-si (hereinafter “G before subdivision”), and H completed the registration of ownership transfer on the said land on the same day.

B. B. Before subdivision, G was divided into I, etc. The said I was divided into J, etc. on December 18, 1963, and the said J was converted into K on December 18, 1963.

On November 28, 1987, the above K was divided into 267 square meters prior to K and 513 square meters prior to L (hereinafter “instant real estate”).

C. The Defendant Republic of Korea completed the registration of initial ownership on the instant real estate by the Changwon District Court Branch No. 3300, Jan. 26, 1988.

Masan-si and Defendant Changwon-si completed the registration of ownership transfer based on the concession dated December 31, 2001 with respect to each of the real property 1/2 shares in each of the instant cases, which was received on November 19, 2002 by the Changwon District Court Msan-si on November 19, 2002. Defendant Changwon-si completed the registration of ownership transfer based on the concession dated December 31, 2001. Defendant Changwon-si completed the registration of total co-owners’ share transfer on September 21, 201 with respect to 1/2 shares in the Masan-si on the instant real property as of September 21, 201, as to 60463 received on September 1,

H died on January 26, 1997, and the Plaintiff, a son of H, succeeded to H’s property.

[Reasons for Recognition] Gap evidence 1 to 8 (including paper numbers), Eul evidence 5-1, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination as to the cause of action

A. The presumption of ownership preservation on land is invalid, unless the registered titleholder proves that he/she is not the original acquisitor and the registered titleholder does not specifically assert or prove the acquisition by succession.

B. (See, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 96Da16247, Jun. 28, 1996).

According to the above facts, F acquired the ownership of G prior to the division, and only the evidence submitted by the Defendants was divided into G prior to the division by Defendant Republic of Korea.