1. The defendant on July 31, 200, as to the plaintiff's forest No. 2,063 square meters in Gyeonggi-gun B forest No. 2,063 square meters.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. According to the Land Survey Book drawn up during the Japanese occupation occupation period, the land survey division was under the circumstances of C residing in the said B around March 10, 1914, with the area converted into the area of 624 square meters (hereinafter “instant land”).

C died on November 15, 1934.

B. According to the land cadastre and the closed copy of the register of the land of this case, E, who has a domicile in Gyeonggi Pyeong-gun, completed registration of preservation of ownership on March 24, 1941.

C. On July 31, 200, the Defendant deemed the instant land as Japan’s property at the time of the dismissal, and completed the registration of transfer of ownership on the ground of the reversion of rights on September 11, 1948 by the Suwon District Court No. 18494, which received the Yangyang District Court’s receipt.

On the other hand, the plaintiff F was born on January 7, 1914 to C's head, and the permanent domicile was Gyeonggi-gu D, and it was changed to E on July 1, 1940.

E. The F died on August 18, 1952 and succeeded to the sole inheritance of ASEAN, and G died on February 24, 1965 and jointly succeeded by wife H, children, I, I, J, K, and L.

The above co-inheritors completed the agreement on division of inherited property as they owned by the Plaintiff.

[Ground for Recognition: Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, Eul evidence 2-1 through 3, Gap evidence 3-1 through 3, Gap evidence 4-1 through 4, Gap evidence 5, and the purport of whole pleadings]

2. Determination

A. According to the above facts, E and F, the Plaintiff’s fleet, who completed the preservation registration of the instant land, shall be deemed the same person. As such, the instant land was not the property owned by Japan at the time of the sea disaster, but the Plaintiff’s property owned by F, the Plaintiff’s fleet, and the Plaintiff inherited the instant land.

B. Therefore, the Defendant is obligated to implement the procedure for registration of cancellation of ownership transfer registration, which was completed as of July 31, 200 by the Sungwon District Court Yangyang District Court Yangyang registry office on the instant land, with respect to the Plaintiff.

3. Conclusion, the Plaintiff’s claim of this case is accepted on the grounds of its reasoning.