1. The Defendant indicated on the attached sheet No. 29, 33, 32, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, and 22.

1. Basic facts

A. At the time of the land investigation conducted around August 17, 191, the 1,863 square meters prior to the division and merger of Pyeongtaek-si Cdong (in the case of the administrative district of the Gu, the Gyeonggi-do Authenticity-gun), G residing in the “Fdong of Seosung-si” was considered as the owner at the time of the land investigation conducted around August 17, 191 (the 44 square meters).

B. On February 26, 1957, E was divided into H-road 1,521 square meters, etc., and land category was changed. On November 6, 1996, the Defendant, following the procedure for acquisition of unregistered real estate, filed a registration of preservation of ownership on the said land, but was combined into B-owned land on November 14, 1997.

(H) The above H land falls under the part of “bb” as indicated in the text, and the above H land does not ask before and after the annexation and does not fall under “b” (hereinafter “instant land”).

On the other hand, the plaintiff I, as a student of October 29, 1910, was living in the GJ from around October 29, 1910 to July 11, 1912, and died on January 23, 1943, and he inherited his property independently. K died on January 1, 1951 and succeeded to L's property solely.

Since L died on October 18, 198, the Plaintiff, M, N,O, P, and Q, who were their children, jointly succeeded to the inheritance. N, in the lawsuit filed by the Plaintiff and M,O, P, and Q, agreed to waive L’s inheritance without asserting any right to L’s inherited property in the lawsuit in Seoul High Court 2008Na13885, which was brought by the Plaintiff and M, P, Q, and M (Death on October 17, 2016), the inheritor of the Plaintiff and M, P, Q, and the above M (Death on October 17, 2016) agreed to divide the inherited property to be solely inherited by the Plaintiff.

【In the absence of dispute over the grounds for recognition, Gap evidence 1-1, 2-1, 2-1, 3-2, Gap evidence 4-1, 2, 3-4, Gap evidence 5, 7, Gap evidence 8-1, 2, 3, and 9, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The allegations and judgment of the parties

A. The following circumstances, i.e., the defendant's duty to transfer the ownership of the reason for the restoration of the true name, (1) the defendant's duty to know based on the above acknowledged facts and records, i.e.