1. Revocation of the first instance judgment.

2. The disposition of boundary determination rendered by the Defendant to the Plaintiff on January 2, 2018 is revoked.

3...

1. The following facts are either in dispute between the parties or in accordance with the purport of Gap evidence 1 through 5, 22, Eul evidence 1, 2, and 3 (including the number of branches where no special indication is made; hereinafter the same shall apply) and the whole pleadings, and there is no reflective evidence:

The Plaintiff owns a lot of 291m2 (hereinafter referred to as “instant land”) in Gyeongsan-si, Busan-si, and D owns a lot of land, outside of 419m2 (hereinafter referred to as “instant land”).

(The specific location and form of each land shall be as shown in the cadastral map in annexed Form 1). (b)

On January 2, 2017, the Gyeongbuk-do Governor designated 214,731 square meters of 300 square meters per day, including the instant land, as the cadastral resurvey project district under the Special Act on Cadastral Resurvey (hereinafter “Special Act on Cadastral Resurvey”). (G) The Defendant, as the project implementer, promoted the cadastral resurvey project for the said project district.

C. On January 2, 2018, the Defendant: (a) made a decision on the boundary of the cadastral resurvey (Evidence A; hereinafter “instant disposition”) with the purport of setting boundaries as indicated in Attached Table 2, on the ground that there was an agreement on boundary between landowners on the instant land, as stipulated in Article 14(2) of the Cadastral Resurvey Act, on the ground that there was an agreement on boundary between the landowners; and (b) notified the Plaintiff in writing on January 8, 2018.

On March 7, 2018, the Plaintiff filed an objection with the Defendant pursuant to Article 17 of the Cadastral Resurvey Act, but was notified of a decision to dismiss the objection on April 2, 2018, and filed an appeal with the Busanbuk-do Administrative Appeals Commission on May 25, 2018, but was dismissed on June 25, 2018.

E. The statutes related to the disposition of this case are as shown in the attached Form 3’s “related statutes.”

2. The parties' assertion

A. The plaintiff's assertion is that the land owner, including the plaintiff, agreed on the boundary of the land of this case as shown in the attached Table 2.