1. All of the plaintiffs' claims are dismissed.

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

1. Basic facts

A. On November 24, 1971, G and H were registered as owners in the said forest register on February 18, 1975, the forest land register for F forest land 45,917 square meters (hereinafter “instant forest”).

B. On July 31, 1995, G sent to G an official door stating “Is the thickness shall be registered as the owner on February 18, 1975 and shall complete the preservation registration within the prompt time of the forest of this case which has not yet been registered.”

C. As G died on June 29, 2016, the Plaintiff A, who is an son, her wife, J, and K renounced inheritance, and the G’s property was inherited solely by the Plaintiff A, who is an son,.

H Deceased on October 10, 1983, the Plaintiff B, C, D, and E (hereinafter referred to as the “Plaintiff B, etc.”) and his/her own property were inherited to Plaintiff B, C, D, and E (hereinafter referred to as the “Plaintiff B, etc.”) and his/her wife. After death on April 11, 199, the Plaintiff B, etc. inherited his/her property.

E. On the instant forest land, G, H and their lineal ascendants are installed.

【Ground of recognition】 The fact that there has been no dispute, Gap 1 through 6, 8, Eul 4 (including a Serial number), or the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The plaintiffs' assertion and judgment

A. The instant forest land asserted by the Plaintiffs is unregistered forest owned by G and H. Since the Plaintiffs succeeded to the said forest land, the said forest land against the Defendant is seeking confirmation on the co-ownership of the said forest land.

B. Since there is no procedure for restoring the destroyed forest register at the time of the enforcement of the former Cadastral Act (wholly amended by Act No. 2801 of Dec. 31, 1975, hereinafter the same applies), the forest register restored by the competent administrative authority in the forest register for administrative convenience cannot be deemed as legally restored. Accordingly, the entry of the owner’s name cannot be the evidence proving the ownership of ownership.

(See Supreme Court Decision 92Da12216 delivered on June 26, 1992, etc.). However, the forest of this case is subject to G in the forest register for forest of this case.