1. All of the plaintiffs' claims are dismissed.

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

1. According to the statement in Gap evidence No. 2, the plaintiff and the defendants shared the 34386 square meters of AF forest in Won-si as shown in the attached Form and co-ownership shares.

2. The plaintiffs cannot accept the claim of this case as stated below, because it is not reasonable to do so.

① The Plaintiffs and 28 Defendants asserted that the pertinent land was in a mutual title trust relationship, respectively, by classifying the Plaintiff and 28 members of the Defendants as the AF Forest (hereinafter referred to as “instant real estate”) in the original city as stated in the attached Form. The Plaintiffs seek implementation of the procedures for ownership transfer registration as stated in the purport of the claim.

However, according to the plaintiffs' assertion, although the purport of the claim is stated in the way that the plaintiffs specified the part of the land owned by them and the defendants' whole share of the specific part of the land is transferred, the defendants' respective share of the specific part of the part to be transferred is not calculated at all, and the form of the claim itself is in an unspecified state because the defendants' respective shares of the part to be transferred are not calculated at all.

(2) In the case of the plaintiffs' assertion, it is necessary to specify the location and area of the part of the instant real estate owned by the plaintiffs among the real estate of this case, but it is not possible to specify it due to the lack of a survey appraisal, despite the court's order to make a statement on the form of the claim and the cause of the claim.

Unlike the attached drawings submitted by the plaintiffs, the division of a road on the drawings is also submitted as evidence in the course of pleadings. Therefore, the location and area of the part asserted as sectional ownership through the survey appraisal need to be confirmed accurately.