1. The defendant falls under the separate sheet of inheritance shares among the real estate listed in the separate sheet Nos. 1 and 2 to the plaintiffs.

Facts of recognition

In the land survey division drawn up in the Japanese occupation point, ① Z (Z, Address disturbance), AA (A, Address disturbance) and AB (AB, on June 191, 32 Z(Z, Address AD), and Z (Z, Address AD), A (AB), network AB (AB, the same address) were written on March 3, 191, respectively.

Subparagraph 4 and subparagraph 2 of Article 4 of the Regulations on the Investigation of the Provisional Land of the Joseon General (Ordinance No. 33, June 7, 1913), which provides that “The address shall be omitted when the address of the owner and the location of the land are the same.”

On April 1, 1914, the Gyeonggi Yangyang-gun AF was integrated into AG of Gyeonggiwon-gun around 1, 1914.

① The above land became the land listed in [Attachment List Nos. 1 and 2 (hereinafter individually referred to as “land”) through the change of administrative district name, division, etc., and when referring together to “the land” according to the sequence.

The defendant completed the registration of ownership preservation on the land Nos. 1 and 2 around February 27, 1996.

② The above land became the third land through the alteration of administrative jurisdiction after the restoration of the land.

Land No. 3 is written in the land cadastre and two persons ( Address AH) outside the Z as its owner, and is unregistered.

On the other hand, the property of the plaintiffs' sea network (Z, permanent domicile, death on April 10, 1951), network AA (AH, permanent domicile, death on September 8, 1934), network AB (AB, permanent domicile: death on July 15, 194) was inherited to the plaintiffs following their lineal descendants, etc.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 40 (including the number of branch numbers), and the result of fact-finding with respect to the National Archives of this Court, but the whole purport of the arguments is the result of the fact-finding, and the fact-finding with respect to whether the plaintiff's team is the same as that of the land in this case, AA, and AB, and the following circumstances as shown in the argument of this case are comprehensively taken into account.