1. Defendant Republic of Korea confirms that Defendant B has ownership with respect to the 1167 square meters of the 11167 square meters of the Gyeongdong-gun, Chungcheongnam-do.

2...

1. Basic facts

A. The entire 1167 square meters (hereinafter “instant land”) was assessed against B, and the registration of ownership was not completed. In the owner’s column of the instant land cadastre, “B” and “B” are written in the address column.

B. Since 1968, E, the Plaintiff’s references occupied the instant land, and the Plaintiff succeeded to the possession from E on February 24, 201, and has occupied the instant land up to now.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 through 9 (including additional numbers), inquiry inquiry of the achieved group, and purport of the whole pleadings

2. According to the above facts of recognition, the Plaintiff succeeded to the possession of E, which was jointly and openly occupied by the intent of possession for at least 20 years prior to November 15, 2017, as well as the possession of the instant land.

As such, Defendant B is obligated to implement the registration procedure for transfer of ownership on November 15, 2017 with respect to the instant land to the Plaintiff on the ground of the completion of acquisition by prescription.

According to the above facts, the evidence mentioned above and the fact-finding inquiry reply on the F pages of the achievement of this court, the land of this case is unregistered, and the lawsuit of this case seeking confirmation of ownership is a benefit of confirmation because it cannot be seen that the registered titleholder is clear, and the defendant Republic of Korea has a duty to confirm that the plaintiff subrogated to the defendant B has ownership of the land of this case.

I would like to say.

3. Therefore, the plaintiff's claim of this case is accepted for reasons of the conclusion.