1. The plaintiffs' appeals against the defendants are all dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal are assessed against the Plaintiffs.

1. The grounds for appeal by the plaintiffs citing the judgment of the court of first instance are not significantly different from the allegations in the court of first instance, and in full view of the evidence submitted in the court of first instance, the fact-finding and judgment of the court of first instance

Therefore, the reasoning of the judgment of this court is that of the first instance judgment, except for adding the following parts and the judgment equivalent to that of paragraphs (2), and therefore, it is cited by the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

O) The main part of the judgment of the court of first instance ① Part 3 through 9 (the grounds of appeal Nos. 1-b and 1-3) are as follows.

“B. The G land of this case is H land before the division of this case (hereinafter referred to as “H land before the division of this case”). The G land of this case is about 487 square meters in the Hah-gun, Gyeongbuk-gun, G, 1959.

I. 159 square meters prior to the instant subdivision (hereinafter “I land prior to the instant subdivision”).

(C) Each land category was changed and divided. C. Defendant Republic of Korea completed the registration of ownership transfer on February 4, 1969 by subrogation pursuant to the former Act on Special Measures for Adjustment of Farmland Reform Project in the name of the Daegu District Court on February 4, 1969, and completed the registration of ownership transfer on the ground of sale in the name of Defendant Republic of Korea as the receipt No. 678 of the receipt of February 4, 1969. ② In the first instance judgment of the first instance court, the term “ March 26, 2019,” in the first instance judgment No. 3, No. 14, “No. 2019, July 28, 2016.”

③ On the 3rd anniversary of the first instance judgment, the part regarding “the deceased D’s property was inherited to the J, a family heir, and the deceased J’s property as a result of the death of theJ,” in the 17th and 19th following the first instance judgment, shall be considered as “K, a family heir, as the family heir.”

2. The addition;

A. The grounds for appeal by the plaintiffs and their decisions 1) The defendant Kim Jong-do, in the grounds for appeal by the plaintiffs, must prove the negligence without fault in the acquisition of the registry, and it did not prove it, and there is no evidence to acknowledge the negligence by the defendant Kim Jong-do, the claim for the acquisition of the registry by the defendant Kim Jong-do should be rejected. 2) The defendant Kim Jong-do, in order to recognize the provisional acquisition by prescription of the registry, shall be occupied.