1. The plaintiff (appointed party)'s appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff (Appointed Party).

1. The defendant's decision as to whether the appointed party appealed or not, since the plaintiff filed an appeal without attaching the list of the appointed parties, the designated parties asserted that they did not file an appeal. However, considering the party appointment letter attached to the complaint of this case, since the plaintiff and the appointed party did not agree on the limitation of the court at the time of filing the lawsuit of this case and did not reach an agreement on the limitation of the court at the time of filing the lawsuit of this case, the effect of the selection shall continue until the lawsuit of this case is completed, and it is reasonable to see that the plaintiff's lawsuit of this case was conducted for both the designated parties as well as the designated parties. The plaintiff's lawsuit

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

2. Facts of recognition;

A. G, the Plaintiff and the Defendant’s fleet, was assessed on September 8, 1930, and G succeeded to the said real estate as a family heir following the death of G around 1952.

B. H died on June 24, 1975, and there was an heir, as his child, I, J, K, and the Plaintiff.

Among them, I was missing at the time of the Korean War, and the period of disappearance on December 1, 1980 has expired, and the heir WW and children have L.

C. On December 7, 2003, J, the father of the Defendant, died on December 7, 2003, and his wife M and children N,O, Defendant, P, and Q as inheritors.

K died on May 6, 198, and there are wife R (Death of July 26, 2002), children S, Plaintiff’s Intervenor B, C, D, and E as inheritor.

E. Meanwhile, on September 22, 1973, the defendant completed each registration of preservation of ownership of the real estate of this case (hereinafter "registration of preservation of this case").

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 3, 5, Eul evidence No. 5 (including each number), the purport of the whole pleadings

3. Determination as to the cause of action

A. The Plaintiff’s summary of the first argument regarding the allegation that the registration for duplicate preservation is null and void is relevant to the instant real estate.