분묘기지권확인
1.(a)
In light of the foregoing, the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) shall bear the indication 12, 22, 30 m2, 30 m2, 300 m2, 32, 300 m2.
A principal lawsuit and counterclaim shall also be deemed a principal lawsuit and counterclaim.
1. The following facts do not conflict between the parties, or each description and image of Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 7, Gap evidence No. 10, 19, and 21 (including each number, if any; hereinafter the same shall apply. The defendant asserts that the images of Gap evidence No. 5-1 and No. 2 are altered among these facts, but there is no evidence to acknowledge them. Rather, according to the result of the court's entrustment to the Legal Video Analysis Institute of this Court, the images of Gap evidence No. 5-1 and No. 2 are deemed not altered or altered), the field inspection results of this court, the results of the appraiser evidence No. 5-1 and No. 2, and the purport of the entire pleadings of the appraiser No. 21-1, contrary thereto, shall not be trusted, and there is no counter-proof.
The plaintiff is a clan consisting of adult descendants who jointly set up the E 15-year-old grandchildren F G H, the third-year-old descendants of which are the three-year-old descendants.
B. There are one grave (hereinafter “instant grave”) in the part (B) of the attached sheet No. 2, 22, 32, 42, and 12, among the 32,138 square meters of C forest land (hereinafter “the instant forest”). The Plaintiff’s clans the instant grave as a co-owner of the said grave, and the Plaintiff’s clans the said grave were sprinked by the instant grave every year, and sprinked around 18,00, around 18, around 190, around 2000.
C. Since the completion of the ownership transfer registration under the name of J on August 16, 1934, the forest of this case had been registered in sequence in the name of the Defendant (LL) on December 18, 1971, K on July 31, 1981, L on December 22, 1986, March 10, 201.
around April 3, 2011, the Plaintiff’s clan M (the Plaintiff’s clan was appointed as the president, who was the representative of the Plaintiff’s clan on January 16, 201) cut off 35 weeks around the instant grave for the protection of the grave, and the Defendant, the owner of the instant forest, did not obtain permission from the Mining Market.