1. The judgment of the first instance, including the plaintiffs' claims for exchange change in this court, is as follows.

1. The defendant's grounds for appeal citing the judgment of the court of first instance are not significantly different from the argument in the court of first instance, and even if the evidence submitted to this court was presented, the fact-finding and judgment of the court of first instance excluding the part concerning the real estate No. 2 in the annexed

Therefore, the court's explanation on this case is consistent with the reasoning of the judgment of the first instance except for the case as set forth in paragraph (2) below. Thus, this court shall accept it as it is in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. On the third part of the judgment of the court of first instance, “the Plaintiff jointly succeeded to the property,” No. 9 of the judgment of the court of first instance, “Plaintiff A, B, and the deceased on August 14, 2017 during the instant lawsuit, and the deceased on August 14, 2017, Plaintiff P, the spouse of the deceased C, and Plaintiff P, the deceased’s spouse, jointly succeeded to the deceased C.”

The third-party 13-14 of the first instance judgment shall be dismissed as follows.

A person shall be appointed.

E. At the time the cadastral record on the land before subdivision was restored on February 1, 1957, the category of real estate listed in the attached Table 1 list (hereinafter “R land”) was restored to “forest”; Q land was restored to “road”; and the division form of each land is as listed in the attached Table 3.

[Attachment 17] No. 4-5 of the judgment of the court of first instance is added to “the grounds for recognition” under the third sentence of the judgment of the court of first instance. The fourth sentence of the judgment of the court of first instance is as follows. “R and Q land were used as a road site by the defendant from September 15, 1927 to September 15, 1947, since it was used as a road site by the defendant around September 15, 1947 when 20 years have elapsed since the time when MR was constructed on the 3 through 6 real estate listed in the attached list No. 1 as of September 15, 1927. The acquisition by prescription was completed, or the authorities legitimately purchased (in respect of Q land, it was also restored to the official record on February 1, 1957 as the Defendant (hereinafter “state”) with its owner as of February 1, 195). It was occupied from around December 1, 193 to the present date.