1. Defendant B, in sequence, indicated in the separate sheet No. 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, and 3 among the land size of 126 square meters in Jinju-si, Jinju-si.

1. Basic facts

A. In the case of Jinju, C. C. 126 square meters (hereinafter “instant land”) is unregistered land.

B. The land cadastre of the instant land is merely indicated that Defendant B acquired the ownership of the instant land on July 4, 1934, and does not state “B”’s date of birth, address, etc.

C. On October 25, 2001, the Plaintiff was merged into E land adjacent to the instant land.

In addition, after completing the registration of ownership transfer on October 28, 1997, the above land and buildings (hereinafter “Plaintiff-owned real estate”) are occupied.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, entry or video of Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, and 3 (including virtual numbers), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Of the Plaintiff’s assertion, part of 66 square meters in the ship that connects each point of the separate sheet Nos. 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, and 3 in sequence among the land in the instant case (hereinafter “instant dispute land”) is a real estate owned by the Plaintiff.

After the Plaintiff purchased real estate owned by the Plaintiff, the Plaintiff also occupies the land in the dispute of this case as its owner.

Therefore, around October 28, 2017, after the lapse of 20 years from October 28, 1997 when the Plaintiff purchased real estate owned by the Plaintiff and completed the registration of ownership transfer, the acquisition by prescription for the Plaintiff’s land in this case was completed.

Therefore, the Plaintiff seeks confirmation of the ownership transfer registration procedure based on the completion of the statute of limitation on the land in the dispute in this case to Defendant B, and the ownership transfer registration procedure based on the completion of the statute of limitation on the land in this case to Defendant B by subrogation of Defendant B.

3. Determination on Defendant Republic of Korea’s main defense

A. The plaintiff, while designating the owner on the land cadastre of this case as defendant B, does not specify the personal information of defendant B on the ground of omission in indication of land cadastre. Since the purport of the claim is unclear, the lawsuit of this case is not required.