1. The plaintiffs' appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal are assessed against the Plaintiffs.

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

1. Basic facts

A. On April 18, 1911, the land research division drafted in accordance with the land research project implemented during the Japanese colonial era stated that the G of the Plaintiffs’ prior to the division was under the assessment of Suwon-gun, Suwon-gun, Gyeonggi-do H 910 (hereinafter “H land before division”).

The deceased G died on July 14, 1946, and the deceased I inherited the deceased's property solely, and the deceased I died on June 6, 2013 and jointly inherited the deceased's property, the plaintiff B, C, D, and E, the spouse of the plaintiff A and his children.

B. The cadastral record, such as the land cadastre of H land, etc., written before the subdivision during the Japanese occupation point period was destroyed by 6.25 pages, but the land cadastre was restored around September 10, 195, which was subsequent to the tidal wave.

On the restored land cadastre, H land was registered as divided into 208 square meters (659 square meters, e.g., the administrative district and unit size changed; hereinafter “instant land”) and 702 square meters before K (hereinafter “K before division”).

On January 15, 1965, K land before subdivision was divided into 514 square meters and L 188 square meters prior to K in Sung-gun of Gyeonggi-do.

C. On November 7, 1996, the Defendant completed the registration of initial ownership (hereinafter “registration of initial ownership”) by the Suwon District Court No. 67482, which received on November 7, 1996.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, Gap evidence 4-1 through 3, Gap evidence 6, 7, Gap evidence 13-1 through 5, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion and judgment

A. A person registered as an owner in a land investigation register for the cause of the claim shall be presumed to be the owner of the relevant land unless there is any counter-proof such as the change of the situation by the adjudication, and the presumption of preservation of ownership shall be shouldered if it is found that a person other than the title holder of the preservation registration was found to have received the relevant land (see Supreme Court Decision 95Da46654, 4661, May 23, 1997), and G, the Plaintiff’s fleet.