logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대전지방법원 2019.03.13 2018가단230158
소유권확인
Text

1. All of the plaintiffs' claims are dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiffs.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The real estate listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “the forest of this case”) is unregistered land. On May 1, 1955, the real estate indicated in the separate sheet (hereinafter “the forest of this case”) is indicated as “L” in the column of the date of change in the forest register for cadastral restoration, and “L” in the cause of change column and “owner column.”

B. M died on April 19, 194, and at the time N in South at that time succeeded to the sole inheritance.

N died on May 10, 1968, and the heir was the plaintiff J, K andO, and P, who were their children. The heir was the plaintiff J, K andO, and the plaintiff I, who was the child of Q that died on January 8, 1965, as the wife of R, the plaintiff, the child of Q that died on January 8, 1965, and the plaintiff I, who was the child of U who died on June 20, 195.

On the other hand, R died on November 11, 1978, and there was Plaintiff A, B, and T as its heir.

In addition, the O died on April 30, 1988, and there was a wife C, a child, V, and Plaintiff D, E, F, G, and H as its inheritor.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 24, purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. In light of the fact that the owner’s restoration was conducted in the forest land register in the name of the network M in the summary of the plaintiffs’ assertion, and that the plaintiff K paid the property tax imposed on the forest land in this case by the network M, the forest in this case was owned by the network M, and the plaintiffs, the heir, were co-owned by the network M.

As such, it is sought to confirm that the plaintiffs share the forest land of this case in their respective shares ratio stated in the separate sheet.

B. Determination 1) The former Cadastral Act (amended by Act No. 165 of Dec. 1, 1950) and its Enforcement Decree, which came into force on December 1, 1950, did not provide for the restoration of the destroyed cadastral record. The former Cadastral Act (amended by Act No. 165 of Dec. 1, 1950) should only be amended by Act No. 2801 of Apr. 1, 1976 (amended by Act No. 2801 of Dec. 31, 1975), when restoring the cadastral record under Article 10 of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act based on Article 13, the competent authority shall be deemed to be identical to the cadastral record at the time of

arrow