1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

1. Basic facts

A. According to the Land Survey Book drawn up during the Japanese Occupation Period, C was under the circumstances of approximately 735 square meters (hereinafter “instant assessment land”) in Yangyang-gun D on August 9, 1915.

B. The instant assessment land was divided, and the land of this case was both the land of this case and the land of Yangyang-gun, J, and K. On June 15, 1956, the registration of transfer was completed due to restitution in the name of L on June 15, 1956.

C. As to the instant land:

6. After the incident on September 30, 1964, a cadastral restoration was made with respect to the land of this case, which was located in a double-entry area, and was recorded as “E Road 25 square meters” in the land cadastre part, and “C” and “the State” in the following order.

The land of this case was located in the road zone of the former National Road, and was re-designated as the national highway M on December 27, 1966 by the Presidential Decree on Route Designation, and was used as the road until now.

E. On September 5, 1975, the Defendant: (a) included the Gangwon-do Yangyang-gun’s land adjacent to the instant land into the M national highways; (b) completed the compensation procedure; and (c) completed the registration of ownership transfer under the name of the Defendant, which was based on sale on the said K’s land.

F. On July 22, 1996, the Defendant completed the registration of preservation of ownership (hereinafter “registration of preservation of this case”) as to the land of this case by the Yangcheon District Court Yangyang District Court No. 4866.

G. On the other hand, F’s south is G, G’s south is H, and the Plaintiff is one of the five South and one female of H.

【Ground of recognition】 The fact that there is no dispute, Gap 1 through 4 (if there is a serial number, including a serial number; hereinafter the same shall apply), Eul 1 through 6, and Eul 8, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. According to the above facts of determination as to the cause of the claim, it is found that C and the Plaintiff’s prior F, the assessment title of the land in this case, are the same person, and that there is a separate assessment title on the land, the registration of ownership preservation of which has been completed under the name of the State.