1.With a view to 850 square meters in Chungcheongnam-gun, Chungcheongnam-do, and Ga.

Defendant Republic of Korea shall have the Defendant C on January 22, 2006.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. As to the area of 850 square meters (hereinafter “instant land”), there are currently overlapping registers.

1) According to the first registry, the registration of ownership transfer in the name of E on June 28, 1918, the registration of ownership transfer in the name of F on September 9, 1918, the registration of ownership transfer in the name of the Republic of Korea on December 7, 2006, the registration of ownership transfer in the name of the defendant on December 1, 193, the registration of ownership transfer in the name of G on the same date, the registration of ownership transfer in the name of H on the same date, the registration of ownership transfer in the name of J on September 3, 1937, the registration of ownership transfer in the name of J on December 28, 1948, the registration of ownership transfer in the name of K on May 15, 1965, the registration of ownership transfer in the name of L on July 5, 197, the registration of ownership transfer in the name of the defendant on December 24, 1986, the ownership transfer in order of the plaintiffs (the plaintiffs).

B. On January 22, 1986, Defendant C purchased the instant land from Nonparty L, and continuously sold the instant land to the Plaintiffs on November 22, 2014.

[Ground for recognition] Defendant Republic of Korea: A without dispute, each entry of Gap evidence 1 through 8 (including each number in the case of provisional number), witness L's testimony and the purport of whole pleadings: Defendant C: by the deemed confession (Article 208(3)2 of the Civil Procedure Act)

2. Determination

A. In the case where a double registration of initial ownership is paid in accordance with the same real estate as a judgment on the cause of the claim, and the double registration of initial ownership is null and void without examining whether the registration of initial ownership does not become null and void (see Supreme Court Decision 96Da12511, Oct. 17, 1996; Supreme Court Decision 96Da12511, Oct. 17, 1996; etc.). The second register which is the subsequent registration of the land of this case is null and void.

Therefore, only the first register shall be valid with respect to the land of this case, and the present registrant is the defendant Republic of Korea.

However, the above facts of recognition are recognized.