1. Each real estate listed in the separate sheet shall be the ratio of 1/5 shares, respectively, by the plaintiffs (appointed parties) and the designated parties.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. Each real estate listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “each real estate of this case”) is unregistered, and the real estate listed in paragraph (1) of the attached list was divided into B land at Chungcheongnam-si on December 26, 197 (1,253 square meters in the area of the real estate listed in paragraph (1) of the attached list after division) and the real estate listed in paragraph (2) of the attached list in paragraph (2) of the attached list was divided into the real estate listed in paragraph (1) of the attached Table on April 1, 2015 (1,247 square meters in the area before division).

B. The land cadastre of each of the instant real estate indicated “C” as the ownership of each of the instant real estate was transferred on September 17, 1914.

C. Following the death of June 10, 1949, the Plaintiff (designated parties; hereinafter “Plaintiffs”) and the designated parties D, who were their descendants, succeeded to Australia and property.

E Deceased on June 23, 199, the heir was the spouse F, the Plaintiff and the designated parties, who were his spouse, and the F died on April 11, 2005.

Plaintiff

In addition, the designated parties filed a lawsuit against the Defendant on the premise that C, the title holder of the assessment of the 1624 square meters wide prior to G, is the decedent of the Plaintiff and the designated parties, claiming the confirmation of ownership of the 1/5 portion of the above land.

(Cheongju District Court 201No. 9016). In the above case, a decision of recommending reconciliation was finalized to the effect that “the above land shall be owned by the Plaintiff and the designated parties in proportion to the shares of 1/5, and the cost of litigation shall be borne by each party.”

[Grounds for recognition] The descriptions of Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 8 and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Although each of the instant real estate is unregistered land, the Defendant’s assertion that there is no benefit to seek confirmation of ownership as the land whose owner is clearly identified on the land cadastre does not fall under the case where the registrant is either or cannot be identified.

In light of Article 130 of the former Registration of Real Estate Act (wholly amended by Act No. 10580, Apr. 12, 2011), the Plaintiff is the case.