1. The defendant shall be the plaintiff.

(a) the Suwon District Court with respect to each real estate listed in the separate sheet Nos. 1 and 2;

1. Basic facts

A. The title holder of the forest survey report on the Gyeonggi-gun Group B (hereinafter “instant land before the instant partition”) is the Defendant.

B. The land before the instant partition was divided into E, which was divided into E, Da, D, and E on December 1, 1967, and the change of registration conversion and the name of administrative district was made, and the land in E, E, Dongcheon-gun was the real estate listed in the attached Table No. 1, and the land in E, Dongcheon-gun, Gyeonggi-gun was the real estate listed in the attached Table No. 2, and the land in E, Gyeonggi-gun, Dong-gun,

C. As to each real estate listed in the separate sheet Nos. 1 and 2, the Defendant filed a registration of preservation of ownership with the Suwon District Court Leecheon District Court Lee, Dongcheon District Court, No. 15341, Jun. 13, 1996, and filed a registration of preservation of ownership as to each real estate listed in the separate sheet No. 3, Jan. 9, 1996, respectively.

G, the permanent domicile of which is located in Ansan-si F, died on July 10, 1953 and succeeded independently by H. H on May 30, 1965, and his son and J succeeded to his son.

I was sentenced to the adjudication of disappearance on June 3, 2015 from the Daejeon Family Court's Support of the Incheon District Court on June 3, 2015 and was dead.

I's co-inheritors are the wife K and the plaintiff who is the wife.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 3, 7, 9, 11, 12, and 13 (including provisional numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination as to the cause of action

A. 1) The owner of the land prior to the instant subdivision requires the investigation and entry of the owner when a protocol of incorporation into a reserved forest was prepared. This is believed to have been different from the entry in the current registry or the forest register at the time, and where an individual entered the “public notice of incorporation into a reserved forest” in the “public notice of incorporation into a reserved forest under national circumstances,” as the basis for such entry, there is the burden of presumption of rights in the entry (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 93Da57841, Feb. 25, 1994). 2) In full view of the respective entries and arguments in the evidence Nos. 4 and 5, the forest of this case is deemed to have been recorded as the owner.