beta
Text
1. The defendant on November 28, 1996, with respect to each real estate listed in the separate sheet to the plaintiff.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
(a) The land survey division prepared in the Japanese occupation point period is indicated as D' residing in the Seongbuk-dong, Sungcheon-gun, Gyeonggi-do (former Jongno-gu, Jongno-gu, Seoul) of the Gyeongcheon-gun, 279 square meters in the land survey division.
B. Each real estate listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “each real estate of this case”) was divided into the land listed in the above paragraph (a). As to each real estate of this case, the registration of preservation of ownership in the name of the defendant was completed on November 28, 1996 under the receipt of No. 1338 on November 28, 1996 (hereinafter “each registration of preservation of ownership in this case”).
C. On August 9, 1918, E: (a) died on August 9, 1918, and F succeeded to E’s property; (b) died on January 14, 1922, G succeeded to F’s property; (c) on September 27, 1978, the Seoul Family Court’s Seoul Family Court Decision on the Declaration of Disappearance of G succeeded to G’s property; and (d) H died on December 23, 1983 and became co-inheritors by the Plaintiff and I.
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 5 (including a provisional number), the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Determination
A. According to the evidence in the judgment on the cause of the claim, in full view of all the circumstances, including the fact that the address at the time of the situation of D, the name of each real estate of this case, is Jongno-gu, Seoul, and the Plaintiff’s prior domicile is also Seoul Jongno-gu, and the name of the Chinese person is recognized. At the time of the assessment of each real estate of this case, there are no materials to deem that D and Dong name were residing in Jongno-gu Seoul at the time of the assessment of each real estate of this case, D and the Plaintiff’s prior domicile are the same person.
On the other hand, a person registered as the owner of the Land Survey Division or the Forest Survey Division shall be presumed to have been assessed as the owner of the land inasmuch as there is no counter-proof that the content of the situation has been changed by an adjudication, and the circumstances have been determined. Accordingly, according to the above recognition, the Plaintiff’s fleet registered as the land Survey Board