1. The part of the judgment of the court of first instance against the Defendants shall be revoked.

2. The Plaintiff, Defendant K prior to the R of Yongnam Cancer-gun 9.

1. Basic facts

A. The land cadastre was registered as AF, AG, AH, and AI on the old land cadastre drawn up in the Japanese colonial era with respect to the 4,771 square meters, Jeonnam-gun, Youngnam-gun.

B. From 4,771 to 31 March 31, 1941, S 346 were divided. After that, the old land cadastre prepared on October 7, 1971 with respect to R 4,190 square meters and S 346 square meters, the owner of each of the above land was registered as AJ, AK, AL, and AM, and on December 11, 1971, the registration of preservation of ownership in the name of AJ, AK, AK, L, and AM was completed with respect to each of the above lands.

In addition, from 4,190 square meters to 4,190 square meters, T forest 210 square meters were re-divided on April 28, 1972.

C. Following the process of the change of administrative district, conversion registration into a square meter, land category change, etc., R forest 4,190 square meters was 9,82 square meters prior to R, and S forest 346 square meters was 1,144 square meters of S forest 1,144 square meters (hereinafter “instant land”). T forest 210 square meters was 694 square meters of T forest 694 square meters (hereinafter “instant land”). The instant land 1 through 3 square meters was d.

On April 4, 199, the AL died on April 4, 199, the registration of ownership transfer was completed in the name of Defendant K, the wife of the AL due to the agreement division on October 10, 2006. Of the land Nos. 2 and 3 of this case, the 1/4 shares of AL were jointly inherited according to the respective inheritance shares of Defendant L, M, N,O, and P, the children of Defendant K and AL.

[Reasons for Recognition] The facts without dispute, Gap's entries in Gap's 1 to 5, 10 to 15 (including a provisional number; hereinafter the same shall apply), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Judgment on the main defense of this case

A. As to the Plaintiff’s party ability, the Plaintiff asserted that the Defendants’ assertion is a clan consisting of descendants who jointly set up a clan, and the instant lawsuit was filed, but N is a processing person, and the clan claimed by the Plaintiff has no substance, and thus, the Plaintiff has no capacity to recognize it. 2)