1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. The owner’s column for land cadastre B, B, 205 square meters (hereinafter “instant land”) at the time of truth-finding, the cause of the change is indicated as C on September 7, 1948.

On the other hand, D, his father, died on December 12, 1955, and succeeded to the rights and obligations of E and his children, who were denied, and E died on September 20, 198 and succeeded to his rights and obligations.

[Grounds for recognition] The descriptions of Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 6, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The Plaintiff’s assertion that the land of this case was transferred by D, the father of the Plaintiff, as above, and thereafter, the Plaintiff succeeded to the ownership due to D’s death.

As long as the Defendant contests the Plaintiff’s ownership, there is a benefit to seek confirmation of ownership against the Defendant.

3. In full view of the written evidence evidence Nos. 1 and 2, as a whole, the address of C in the land cadastre column for the land of this case was vacant, and its address appears to be “CF” as the land of this case. On the other hand, as the Plaintiff’s father, the Plaintiff’s transcript of the family register Nos. 1 and 2, the fact that the legal domicile, place of birth, and the place of death were written “G G at Jin-si” can be acknowledged.

In light of the above, it is difficult to readily conclude that C and the Plaintiff’s father D are the same person solely on the basis of the descriptions of Gap evidence 7 and 8 (including additional numbers), and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it.

Therefore, the plaintiff's above assertion is without merit.

4. Conclusion, the plaintiff's claim of this case is dismissed as it is without merit.