1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Basic facts

A. The content of the Forest Survey document concerning the forest of this case and the Defendant’s registration of preservation of ownership is completed 1) on August 30, 1986, the forest of this case, namely, the forest of this case, i.e., the owner’s “state”, and the relative “D (E)” as to the forest of this case, i.e., the forest of this case, B 2 7 Y and 7 malle 6 mar in the forest of this case, i.e., the owner’s “state” and “D.” In addition, the part of the forest of this case, as indicated in the forest of this case, is indicated as “D.”

B. On August 17, 1952, the death of F and the Plaintiff’s inheritance 1) deceased on August 17, 1952, G, the head of the network F, was solely succeeded to the property of the network F as Australia. On February 16, 1976, G, the deceased on August 29, 2002, H, I, and the Plaintiff jointly succeeded to the property of the network G. The deceased on August 29, 2002, H, who was the deceased’s children. At the time, H was the heir of the network, J, K, H, L, M, and I, but the Plaintiff purchased the forest of this case from the network E by the network, and the deceased G was the sole possession of the instant forest by the Plaintiff.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 4, 6, 8, 9, 10 (Evidence Nos. 1, 4, 6, 8, 9, 10, hereinafter the same shall apply) and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Judgment on the plaintiff's claim

A. On March 5, 1934, 1934, the network E, which caused the Plaintiff’s claim, is the original acquisitor with the assessment of the instant forest. The Plaintiff purchased the instant forest from the network E, and the Plaintiff succeeded to the instant forest from the networkF in sequential order, and thus, the instant forest is owned by the Plaintiff.

However, since the defendant completed registration of preservation of ownership in the forest of this case by means of the 625 War in which the register and the cadastral record have been lost, registration of preservation of ownership in the name of the defendant is null and void.

Therefore, the defendant is against the plaintiff.