1. Revocation of a judgment of the first instance;

2. Based on the selective claims added at the trial court, the defendant shall be free to the plaintiff.

1. Basic facts

A. On September 29, 197, the instant forest was divided into six years (6 years in 1917) the Plaintiff’s village residents, AE, etc., and the said forest was divided into five hundred and sixty-five thousand square meters (hereinafter “instant forest”) and five hundred and sixty-five thousand square meters (hereinafter “instant forest”).

B. On October 31, 1970 with respect to the instant forest land, registration of preservation of ownership was completed under the joint name of 13 community residents (13 residents, including D, E, F, G, H, I, J, K, K, L, M, N,O, and P; hereinafter “D”).

C. Of the instant forest land, the registration of ownership transfer was completed on April 14, 201 with respect to the shares of 1/13 in the name of K (hereinafter “instant shares”) on the grounds of inheritance due to the agreement and division as of June 4, 2001.

On October 201, the Plaintiff filed an application for conciliation with the purport that: (a) the owner of the forest of this case (including 13 persons, including D, etc. or the aforementioned D, etc.) shall return the forest of this case, as the forest of this case was originally owned by the Plaintiff; and (b) the forest of this case was originally owned by the said D, etc., and thus, (c) the said D, etc. shall return the forest of this case.

Accordingly, on February 22, 2013, the said court rendered a decision in lieu of conciliation that “the owners of the instant forest, other than the Defendant, carry out the procedures for ownership transfer registration on the gift on November 10, 2010 with respect to the pertinent co-owned share among the instant forest land,” and the said decision became final and conclusive around that time for the remaining owners, other than Q, R, S, T, U,V, W, X, andY (hereinafter “S, etc.”) who were not served.

E. On June 17, 2013, the part against the Defendant and nine including Q, etc. for which the judgment was not finalized among the application for the mediation of the Youngju District Court’s Youngdong Branch, and the part against the Defendant was implemented as the Cheongju District Court’s Young-dong Branch case No. 2013Kadan1609, and the Plaintiff withdrawn the lawsuit against the Defendant on November 8, 2013 in the above case.

On November 22, 2013, the lower court held that nine persons, including Q, etc., share in the pertinent forest land among the instant forest land, on November 10, 2010.