2. The plaintiff's conjunctive claim shall be dismissed by this court.

A. The land research division, which was investigated and prepared by the Korea-U.S. and the Korea-U.S. Temporary Land Survey Division, stated that the “state” was assessed against the 450 square meters (hereinafter “the land prior to the division of this case”).

B. Each real estate listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant real estate”) is used as a site, such as the scambry, etc., or as a road, as the land successively divided from the land before the instant partition.

As to the instant real estate on September 18, 1979, the Defendant completed each registration of preservation of ownership on the land 566, which is the land remaining of the instant real estate on July 11, 1986, and on the land 566-1,566-4, which is the land remaining of the instant real estate.

【Ground of recognition】 The fact that there has been no dispute, Gap 1 through 3, 10, and 11 (including virtual numbers), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. On December 19, 2017, the Plaintiff alleged to the effect that he/she would withdraw the primary claim from the preparatory document as of December 19, 2017. However, on May 29, 2018, the Plaintiff expressed his/her intention to maintain the existing primary claim on the second date for pleading after remanding.

The gist of the party’s assertion 1) The real estate of this case falls under the “ Confucian School Property” as referred to in Article 194 of the Military Court Act, and belonged to the fundamental property of the Plaintiff Foundation established pursuant to Article 194 of the Military Court Act. Nevertheless, since the registration of preservation of ownership of the real estate of this case was completed with respect to the real estate of this case, the Defendant is obligated to implement the registration procedure for transfer of ownership based on the restoration of real name in the name of the real owner. 2) Since the real estate of this case was assessed under the name of the State at the time when the Japanese occupation was Japanese occupation, it does not fall under the “ Confucian School Property” as referred to in Article 194 of the Military Court Act.

Therefore, the real estate of this case is a military law.