1. The Plaintiff:

A. Defendant B shall have jurisdiction over the area of H 4053 square meters of forests and fields in Jung-Eup, Jeonju District Court.

1. The facts of recognition do not conflict between the parties, or when comprehensively considering the purport of the entire pleadings in Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 2, ① The plaintiff’s father, I and J own 1/2 shares of H 4053 square meters (hereinafter “the land in this case”) and the plaintiff’s owner who currently holds shares of 1543/4053. The land in this case is

2. Determination as to the claim

A. According to the above facts, Defendant B appears to have held a claim on April 13, 191 against J. However, as there is no clear assertion on the due date, Defendant B could exercise its right at the time of the occurrence of the claim, the extinctive prescription of the above claim without a fixed due date. According to this, it appears that the extinctive prescription has expired on April 12, 2001 from the date ten years have elapsed since the above claim occurred. Therefore, Defendant B, a co-owner of the land of this case, is liable to implement the procedure for the cancellation of the registration of the establishment of the above neighboring mortgage. (2) Defendant B’s assertion on Defendant B’s assertion, barring any special circumstance, submitted the written statement on March 10, 2020, submitted the written statement to Defendant B to the Plaintiff on March 10, 2020, it was impossible to find out the Plaintiff’s request for auction, but it was difficult to find out the existence of the auction and the claim actually existed, but it does not wish to interfere with the completion of the extinctive prescription.