1. All of the plaintiff's claims are dismissed.

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

1. Basic facts

A. 1) On December 20, 1959, the forest land D, located in the separate sheet, located in the area where each land in the separate sheet is divided, is located in the area where it is located in the area where it is located in the area where it is located in the area where the area is located in the area where

(E) 281 square meters prior to E (hereinafter “E land”).

(F) 2,710 square meters of F Forest land (hereinafter “F land”).

(2) As the administrative district was changed on February 15, 1983, D land was changed to 7,97 square meters of forest land in south-gun, Southern-gun (hereinafter “G land”); E land was changed to land listed in paragraph (1) of attached Table 1; and F land was changed to land listed in paragraph (2) of attached Table 2.

3) G land was divided into one land, other than that listed in [Attachment 3] List No. 3 on December 24, 1984, and one land listed in the annexed List No. 4). Each land cadastre is unregistered until now, and H is registered as a continuous owner from May 9, 1934.

B. H’s inheritance relationship 1) Deceased on April 5, 1978, and H jointly succeeded to the property of the deceased H H by their I and his father. 2) On October 24, 1986, H died on October 24, 1986, and the Defendant (Appointed Party), K, L, M, N,O,O, and Defendant C jointly succeeded to the property of the deceased I.

C. The deceased P on April 20, 201, and the Plaintiff, Q and children, who are the spouse, and R, S, T and U shared inheritance of the deceased P’s property.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts that the parties do not clearly dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 3, 9, and 10, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Plaintiff’s assertion and judgment thereon

A. The Plaintiff is the cause of the instant claim. On May 7, 1966, the network P purchased KRW 254 square meters from the network H from KRW 9,400, and on May 24, 1966, the sale object was modified into KRW 840,00,00 in total, “former 602 square meters” and “forest 238 square meters”. As such, Defendant C, the heir of the network H, and Defendant C, the heir of the network H, and the Plaintiff, the heir of the network P, in light of the size and location of the original contract, indicated in the separate sheet in paragraphs 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 1-2 of the land indicated in the separate sheet in paragraphs 1 and 2 of the same Table and the land indicated in paragraph 3 of the same Table.