beta
Text
1. The defendant on November 8, 1957, as to the land stated in paragraph 1 of the attached list to the plaintiff.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. As to the land listed in paragraph (1) of the attached Table No. 1, the Defendant completed each registration of preservation of ownership as to the land listed in paragraph (5) of the attached Table No. 2107, which was received on November 8, 1957 from Suwon District Court, as to each land listed in paragraphs (2) and (3) of the attached Table No. 2181, which was received on November 8, 1957 from Suwon District Court, as to the land listed in paragraph (4) of the attached Table No. 4 of the attached Table No. 7160, which was received on April 10, 1996 from Suwon District Court Branch Branch, and as to the land listed in paragraph (5) of the attached Table No. 2182, Nov. 8, 1957.
B. The Plaintiff’s preference C had a permanent domicile in the Female-gun of Gyeonggi-do. However, upon the death of the above C on January 15, 1951, E inherited the property of E, i.e., children, including the Plaintiff, due to the death of the E on June 1, 2004.
[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1-1, Gap evidence 2-1, 2-1, Gap evidence 3-1, Gap evidence 4-1, Gap evidence 9, 10, and the purport of the whole pleadings
2. The Plaintiff’s assertion that each of the lands listed in the separate sheet was owned by C, the preference of the Plaintiff, and that each of the lands listed in the separate sheet was determined in the farmland distribution process under the former Farmland Reform Act (repealed by Act No. 4817, Dec. 22, 1994; hereinafter “former Farmland Reform Act”) and the Defendant was not allocated, and the ownership was returned to F, the original owner. Therefore, the Plaintiff sought cancellation of registration of ownership preservation on each of the lands listed in the separate sheet.
3. As to the claim against the land listed in the separate sheet No. 1
A. According to the overall purport of Gap evidence Nos. 1-1-5, Gap evidence Nos. 5, 6, Gap evidence Nos. 7-1-4, Gap evidence Nos. 8 and 23 as to the cause of the claim, and the whole purport of the arguments and arguments, ① Innju City Gri (hereinafter referred to as "Gri") of Gyeonggi-do (hereinafter referred to as "Gri") H No. 541, which was purchased by the defendant in the course of farmland distribution.