1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

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

1. The Plaintiff’s assertion that B (mainly, Incheon reinforcement Group C) is the Plaintiff’s lighting, the assessment title of the instant land.

B He died on December 20, 1920 before December 20, 1920, and on June 21, 1926, B and D’s children E, and F’s whereabouts and whereabouts are unknown after moving to Yagdo G on June 21, 1926.

Since June 21, 1926, H, the father of B and the Plaintiff, was in possession of the instant land in a public performance with the intention to own it, and died on April 19, 1954.

The plaintiff independently succeeded to the family head of H as his inheritor.

Therefore, the Defendant seeks confirmation of ownership of the instant land.

2. A claim for the confirmation of land ownership against the country of judgment is unregistered, and there is no registered titleholder on the land cadastre or forest land cadastre, or the identity of the registered titleholder is unknown, and there is a benefit of confirmation in special circumstances, such as continuing to assert State ownership while the State denies the ownership of a third person who is a registered titleholder.

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 94Da27649, Sept. 15, 1995). Although the land of this case is unregistered, the owner in the forest land register is indicated as “B located in Incheon-gun C or IriB,” and there is no evidence suggesting the identity between the owner in the above register and the Plaintiff’s protocol and the Plaintiff’s protocol or claiming the ownership of the land of this case.

Therefore, the Plaintiff has no interest in seeking confirmation of ownership of the instant land against the Defendant Republic of Korea.

In addition, the plaintiff asserts the acquisition by prescription, and it is necessary to use the method of filing a claim for ownership transfer registration against the owner at the time of the completion of the prescription that loses ownership due to the completion of the prescription, and there is no benefit to seek confirmation that there is ownership against the third party.

In addition, the period of prescriptive acquisition has expired.