1. He/she shall verify that the forest B/Gun in Gyeonggi-do is 28,860 square meters owned by the plaintiff;

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by each person;

1. Basic facts

A. The report on the survey of the forest land in Gyeonggi-do, the Gyeonggi-do, the Japanese-gun, the Japanese-do, the Japanese-gun, the Japanese-gun, the Japanese-gun of the instant forest land was indicated as the address of B 2, 9,100 square meters of forest land B (hereinafter “the instant forest land was 28,860 square meters of forest land following the conversion of the area after its conversion; hereinafter “E”), which was a “D interest”.

The forest land of this case was destroyed by the 6.25 column, and the cadastral record was destroyed on December 30, 1965, but its owner was the official column for recovery from the unclaimed land.

B. The date of the deceased F’s death and inheritance relationship 1) the deceased F’s death and inheritance relationship 1) led to the death of the deceased F, and the deceased I became the head of South Ha on the ground of the divided family of the Ha Nam-gun G of Gyeonggi-do. The I was in the form of J (ma), K (ma), L (ma), M (3, M (M), N (4),O (5), P (6). On the other hand, the deceased on August 16, 2016, M was in the 1983 status, M was in the permanent domicile of the deceased TF, and M was in the form of "Ycheon-gun, Gyeonggi-do, Qu-do, Q and Ham in the Republic of Korea", and R was in the form of T and T marriage, and R was in the form of the plaintiff, Ma, U (V), V (M (M), M (5), and Y (6).

H died on September 5, 1949; R on May 30, 1981; T on January 4, 1994; U on March 19, 197, respectively.

3) V: (a) as of March 14, 2018; (b) as of March 16, 2018, as of March 16, 2018, the Plaintiff solely inherited the R’s property by waiver of its respective inheritance shares; (c) the fact that there is no dispute (based on recognition); (d) evidence A1 through 4; and (e) the purport of the entire pleadings.

2. As seen earlier prior to the determination on the cause of the claim, in light of the following: (a) Dong F, the title holder of the Plaintiff’s expansion and support for the instant land, and Eul, the title holder of the instant land, were identical to Chinese name; (b) H, the Plaintiff’s assistance group, was divided into “Y in Gyeonggi-do, Gyeonggi-do; and (c) H’s permanent domicile is “Y in Gyeonggi-do,” and “D interest” such as the network F’s address indicated in the forest research document, it is deemed that the Plaintiff’s expansion and support net F and E, the title holder of the instant land, is the same person.

However, according to the custom prior to the enforcement of the Civil Code, if Australia died, the heir of the property.