1. The Defendant is among the Ulsan-gu G field 3839 square meters, Ulsan-gu G field:

A. As to the share of 3 percent to Plaintiff A

B. Plaintiffs B, C, D, and.

The deceased H(hereinafter referred to as the “Death”) had children, such as the “J” and the “K” (However, later L’s bilateral entry).

Of them, the Republic of South and North J listed S and T with children of F (F, F: Ma) according to the satisfaction table submitted by the Plaintiffs, and the head of Ulsan Metropolitan City, the head of the Gu in Ulsan Metropolitan City, sent to this Court on November 6, 2015, shall accurately coincide with those recorded in the F’s transcript (the name and birth date, and related person). Accordingly, the identity of two persons is recognized, and the South and North Korea also filled with “N”.

O is N's 2 South Korea, and the deceased is the president of theO.

N, at least since 1931, since "Ulsan-gu P (former address: Ulsan-gun Q)", F had the permanent domicile as "Ulsan-gu R, Ulsan-gu, whose domicile is not far away from that domicile."

On May 1, 193, the transfer registration of ownership was made in the defendant (F) on the land entered in the order (hereinafter referred to as the "land of this case").

The defendant's domicile on the registry was the "R".

Accordingly, identity is recognized between the Defendant, the owner of the instant land, and F, the private relationship between N.

The above facts are recognized as the entries in Gap evidence 1 through 8, the inquiry inquiry reply of the head of Ulsan Central District Office on November 6, 2015, and the purport of the whole pleadings.

In this case, the plaintiffs asserted that N residing near the land of this case, which had not been able to manage the land of this case since 1945 to 1950, purchased and cultivated the land of this case from the defendant who was unable to manage the land of this case and donated the land to the next sonO. As the deceased, who was son, married with the plaintiff A on March 5, 1976, he again donated the land to the deceased to cultivate the land of this case.

According to Gap evidence Nos. 5-1 through 4, it is recognized that the deceased occupied the land of this case at least around March 5, 1976 and cultivated crops.

The Deceased has already been imposed on the land of this case.