1. The Defendant received on August 26, 1991 from the Suwon District Court as the Plaintiff with respect to the land size of 284 square meters in Pyeongtaek-si B.

1. Basic facts

A. The land investigation register of the Gyeonggi-do Authenticity-gun, which was prepared by the shipbuilding and land investigation division in force during the Japanese occupation period, is written by F, which was conducted by the Do governor-general, around May 1911 (Name 44) and was conducted by F, who was 86 square meters with an address in Eri, around May 191.

B. Authenticity-gun was replaced on October 1, 1938 by Pyeongtaek-gun, and part of Pyeongtaek-gun Cri was incorporated into Pyeongtaek-gun G on April 1, 1989 and Hri was newly established, and the authenticity-gun D 86 square meters was 284 square meters in Pyeongtaek-gun. Since the administrative district was changed thereafter, it became Pyeongtaek-si B 284 square meters in size (hereinafter “instant land”).

C. On August 26, 1991, the Defendant completed the registration of ownership preservation on the instant land by the Suwon District Court No. 34832, which received on August 26, 1991.

K, who has a permanent domicile in the Gyeonggi-do AuthenticityJ, died on January 31, 1947, and L, who is the president of K, succeeded to Australia.

L was killed on February 24, 1979, and the plaintiff et al. jointly succeeded to L's property.

E. Meanwhile, the Suwon E had been changed to the truth-finding prior to 1917.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap 1 through 9, 11, and 12, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination as to the cause of action

A. Whether K is the same person as the situation titleholder of the land in this case and the Plaintiff’s lighting division K are the same, and the situation titleholder of the land in this case and the Plaintiff’s lighting division K were the same as Chinese name before 1917, and the E, which is the domicile and supplementary domicile of the situation titleholder, was changed to the truth-gun M&D before 1917. K’s permanent domicile is the Jin-gun, and at the time of the land situation, there were no special circumstances to deem that E, as well as the Plaintiff’s lighting and name, were residing in the same person at the time of the land situation, it is reasonable to view K as the same person.

(b) Where a person is registered as an owner in the land investigation register where the obligation to cancel registration of ownership preservation has occurred, the content thereof has been changed by adjudication.