1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

2. A separate list, upon the plaintiff's preliminary claims added by this Court,

1. In the first instance court, the Plaintiff sought confirmation of ownership ownership of each real estate listed in the separate sheet. The first instance court dismissed the part of confirmation of ownership of real estate listed in the separate sheet No. 1 (hereinafter “instant land”) and dismissed the part of confirmation of ownership of real estate listed in the separate sheet No. 2 (hereinafter “instant land No. 2”).

As to this, the plaintiff appealed against only the second part of the land of this case, the subject of adjudication of this court is limited to the second part of the confirmation of ownership of the land of this case.

2. Facts of recognition;

A. The land No. 1 in the instant case is considered as C from September 18, 1913 on the land cadastre, and the land No. 2 in the instant case was assessed as D on June 20, 1914.

B. C had son, E was the only child between F and F on June 23, 1958, and the Plaintiff was born on G date as the only child between E and F.

C. C died on July 19, 1928, and upon the death of Australia, E, a family heir, inherited his/her own property, and E died on June 27, 1964.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence Nos. 1 to 9, the purport of the whole pleadings

3. The land No. 2 of the Plaintiff’s assertion is indicated in the name of D in the land cadastre, but it is erroneous for the Plaintiff’s father, E.

Therefore, the Plaintiff and F inherited land No. 2, and F reported marriage with E after having given birth of the Plaintiff, and thereafter, the date of birth or permanent domicile of the Plaintiff cannot be known.

First, as F gives birth to the Plaintiff on G date, it is clear that F died at the present point in view of the empirical rule, and therefore, the land No. 2 of this case is owned by the Plaintiff.

Preliminaryly, even if F did not die, the land No. 2 of this case was inherited by the Plaintiff and F, respectively, 1/2 shares of the land No. 2 of this case are owned by the Plaintiff.

4. Determination

A. The above.