1. The defendant on May 7, 1996, concerning the land stated in the attached list 1 and 2 to the plaintiff.

1. Basic facts

A. According to the land survey division on the No. 1,272 (hereinafter “No. 1 land before subdivision”) and the No. 130 square meters (hereinafter “No. 2 land before subdivision”), each of the above lands is indicated as being under the circumstance of E at the address of “No. 1,272 south-west D”.

B. Since then, the land No. 1 was divided into the land listed in paragraphs (1) and (2) of the annexed Table No. 1, and the land listed in paragraphs (2) of the annexed Table No. 2 was divided into the land listed in paragraphs (3) and (4) of the annexed Table No. 3 and the land listed in paragraph (4) of the annexed Table No. 3 of the annexed Table (hereinafter referred to as the “land of this case,” and the land is collectively referred

As to the land of this case Nos. 1 and 2 on May 7, 1996, the defendant completed the registration for the preservation of ownership on May 1, 1996 as to the land of this case No. 3 and 4 on May 1, 1996 (hereinafter "each of the registration for the preservation of ownership of this case").

(d)

On February 4, 1966, F of the Plaintiff’s father F (F, permanent domicile: Seoul Jung-gu G) died, and his wife and children I, J, K, L, M, N, andO inherited F’s property. On November 30, 2008, I died on November 30, 2008, the Plaintiff et al., his wife P and his child, et al. jointly succeeded to I’s property.

E. Around 1946, designation was changed to Qgu Seoul Central District Q Dong, which is the administrative district of the address of the nominal owner of each land of this case.

[Ground for recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 8, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. In light of the following circumstances that can be seen by comprehensively taking into account the facts of the determination as to the cause of the claim and the purport of the entire pleadings, namely, the administrative district located in the name of the owner of each land of this case, “Seoul Central District Q Dong,” which is the administrative district located in the name of the owner of each land of this case, was the old name of “Seoul Central District Q Dong,” and the person “E” in the administrative district of this case at the time of the situation of each land of this case did not exist except the Plaintiff’s assistance. In light of the above, the Plaintiff’s assistance division F was under the circumstances of each land of this case.