1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff, including the part resulting from the supplementary participation.

1. Basic facts

A. The plaintiff's assertion in the lawsuit of this case is a non-corporate body that has a decision-making agency and executive agency with its own purpose as a natural village consisting of the residents of macrosi E, and the Gu macro-Gun (a large-gun was integrated into the Si of 1995 and presented as a result of the 1995) obtained a license to reclaim public waters from macro-gun C (hereinafter "D of this case") for farmland creation from the defendant around 1964. G on September 6, 1964, which was delegated with the reclamation work, provides the plaintiff with seven answers created within the D reclaimed land of this case in return for the provision of the plaintiff's digging plantation, forest collection, and collection of woodland.

“The Plaintiff is the right holder who acquired the ownership of the reclaimed land of this case, since it was written out a letter with the content (hereinafter “instant letter”).

B. On February 14, 2005, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against Changwon District Court 2005Kadan1284 on the ground of the above assertion against Masi-si seeking the implementation of the procedure for ownership transfer registration regarding reclaimed land corresponding to the 7 information of each of the instant documents. However, the above judgment became final and conclusive on February 12, 2007, following the appellate court and the final appeal on February 12, 2007, on the ground that “the person who obtained the reclamation license of public waters of this case around the time of the preparation of the instant documents is B, etc., and the ownership of the reclaimed land after the completion of the reclamation work is attributed to B, a licensee, and thus, the Plaintiff’s right to the reclaimed land of this case is not recognized.”

C. In the above final and conclusive judgment, on June 1, 1963, the court recognized that five persons, including B, obtained a license to reclaim public waters of this case, representing B, farmland for the purpose of reclamation from the Defendant, creating farmland for the purpose of reclamation, tide embankments and internal field construction works, and reclamation area 48.7ha (hereinafter “instant license”).