All of the plaintiffs' claims are dismissed.

The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the plaintiffs.

1. Basic facts

A. On October 10, 1913, the network H (hereinafter referred to as “the network”) was under circumstances of 918 square meters in the Gi-gun of the Gyeonggi-si (current Yang-si, Ji-dong, hereinafter “I-do”).

Since then, the above land was divided into L 484 square meters (referring to the land indicated in the purport of the claim, 1,600 square meters; hereinafter “instant land”) and M 434 square meters (1,435 square meters). The deceased died on June 5, 1949.

B. On December 29, 1969, the Defendant completed the registration of preservation of ownership (hereinafter “registration of preservation of this case”) such as the purport of the claim in its name regarding the land of this case.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 4 (including branch numbers), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The gist of the plaintiffs' assertion was that the deceased acquired the ownership of the land of this case in original condition, and the plaintiffs inherited the deceased's property as the descendants of the deceased, so the plaintiffs are currently the owners of the above land.

However, the defendant completed the preservation registration of this case on the above land. Since the above preservation registration is invalid, the defendant is obligated to implement the procedure for cancellation registration of the above preservation registration to the plaintiffs.

3. Determination

A. In order to seek the cancellation of registration of preservation of ownership in another person’s name, which was completed in relation to the real estate as part of the exercise of the right to demand the exclusion of interference based on the ownership of the real estate, an affirmative assertion and proof of the title holder having the right to demand the cancellation thereof should be given to him/her first (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2004Da5044, Sept. 28, 2005). If the fact that the title holder disposes of the land to another person after the circumstance is acknowledged, the title holder or his/her heir has no right to demand the cancellation of the registration against the title holder, and such claim cannot be accepted.

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2011Da85987, Jan. 12, 2012). Moreover, public documents presumed to be genuine are contrary to the truth.