Plaintiff (Attorney Choi Han-chul, Counsel for the plaintiff-appellant)

Defendant 1 and one other (Law Firm Mumak, Attorneys White-sung et al., Counsel for the defendant-appellant)

January 4, 2013

Chuncheon District Court Decision 2011Da15130 decided June 29, 2012

1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. Purport of claim

The Plaintiff: (1) Defendant 2 shall excavate a grave installed on the 90m2 in the order of 14257m2 with an indication of drawings; (2), 3, 34, 36, 37, and 32 of 1427m2; (3) the part of the said land shall be delivered; (2) the portion of the said land shall be removed in the order of 38,39, 40, 41, 42, and 38m2; (3) the portion of the graves installed on the 45m2 surface in the order of 95m2; (4); (4) the portion of the graves installed on the 4m3m2 in the order of 145m2; and (4) the portion of the graves installed on the 4m3m2 in the order of 4m3m2; and (4) the portion of the graves installed on the 4m3m2 in the attached drawing; and (4) the portion of the graves installed on the 4m2.

2. Purport of appeal

The part of the judgment of the court of first instance against the plaintiff shall be revoked. The defendant 2, among the 14257 square meters of forest land in Won-si ( Address omitted), shall excavate a grave installed on the 90 square meters of the part inside the ship (B), which connects each point of 142,34,35,36,37,32, and the above part of the land shall be delivered; the defendant 1, in the order of 38,39,40,41,42, 38, among the 1427 square meters of forest land in Won-si ( Address omitted), 1, 45 square meters of the land attached hereto; 2, 1, 444, 45 square meters of the land attached hereto; 1,45 square meters of the land attached hereto; 4,45 square meters of the land attached hereto; 1,45 square meters of the land attached hereto; 39,43,445,400 square meters of the land attached hereto;

1. Quotation of judgment of the first instance;

The reasoning for the court's explanation on this case is that "it is possible to acknowledge the facts" of No. 5, No. 17 of the first instance court's ruling "(5), and each statement of No. 3-1, No. 2, No. 5, No. 8, and No. 9 of the evidence No. 3-2 of the evidence No. 8, No. 9, and No. 12-2 of the evidence No. 12 of the court's ruling is insufficient to reverseize the above recognition [In light of the whole purport of the evidence No. 8, No. 9, and No. 12-2 of the evidence No. 12, Nov. 28, 2007, Non-party 7 appeared at the witness of the above 2005Ga12079, and testified that "No. 6 period has been increased due to this case's agent's questioning after 200 years after IMF," and that Non-party 7 testified stated the above facts and No. 2 of the prosecution No. 201 of this case's.

2. Conclusion

Therefore, the judgment of the court of first instance is legitimate, and the plaintiff's appeal is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.

[Attachment]

Judges Kim Jong-sub (Presiding Judge)