1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Facts of recognition;

A. (1) At the time of the Japanese occupation, C was under the circumstances of the land-related land-related land-related land-related land-related land-related land-related land (hereinafter “instant land-related land-related land”) and the land-related land-related land of the leisure-gun of Gyeonggi-do 597 square meters (hereinafter “instant land-related land-related land-related No. 2”).

(2) Ginju-gun D 1,176 square meters was registered for restoration in around 1957, and F field 298 square meters (hereinafter “instant land”) and G, H, and I land was divided into G, H, and I land.

(3) The Ginju-gun E, Gyeonggi-do 597 square meters was divided into J 1,412 square meters (hereinafter “instant land”) 1,412 square meters, K 469 square meters, and L 93 square meters (attached Table 1 List 3; hereinafter “instant land”).

(4) As to the land No. 1 of this case, the Defendant completed the registration of ownership preservation as the head of Suwon District Court Yangyang District Court No. 2179, Feb. 2, 1996, and as to the land No. 2 and 3 of this case, the above registration office No. 1264, Nov. 27, 1958, and each registration of ownership preservation was completed.

B. The Plaintiff’s inheritance relationship (1) M had children N, and died in around 1943.

(2) N means 1954 (short-term 4287)

6.3. Death. The head of South-North O inherited property solely at the same time as the family inheritance.

(3) P, Q, R, S, T, U,V, and W were children, and died on March 29, 1972.

(4) The Plaintiff is a Pian child.

(5) There is no other Y, other than the Plaintiff’s fleet N, which had been presumed to have been residing in the Yangyang-gun of Gyeonggi-do in around 1912, and there is no other Y located in the Gyeonggi-do Yangyang-gun of Gyeonggi-do in around 1943.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, entry of Gap evidence 1 through 8 (including each number in the case with a satisfy number), the purport of whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. In full view of the evidence and the purport of Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 5, prior to the determination of the cause of the claim, C, the assessment title of the land of this case Nos. 1 and 2.