1. As to the portion of each of 1/5 shares to Plaintiffs A, B, C, and D among the lands listed in paragraph 2 of the attached Table No. 2, Defendant H March 3.

1. The facts in the separate sheet against Defendant H as to the determination of the claim against Defendant H do not have any dispute between the Plaintiff and Defendant H.

Thus, Defendant H is obligated to implement the registration procedure for ownership transfer on the part of Plaintiff A, B, C, and D with respect to each of 1/5 shares of 3/35 shares among the lands listed in the separate sheet No. 2, and on the part of Plaintiff F and G with respect to each of 2/35 shares of 2/35 shares for each of the reasons for the recovery of authentic names.

2. Determination as to the claim against Defendant Female

A. 1) Basic Facts 1) The Land Survey Division prepared with respect to the GIri-gun of Gyeonggi-do during the Japanese occupation period was registered as K as the owner of the land before J 738 (hereinafter referred to as the “J”) and its address is vacant. 2) Defendant Inn-si completed the registration of ownership transfer of real estate in accordance with the Act on Special Measures for the Registration of Ownership Transfer of Real Estate Rights (No. 3562) with respect to the land located within the Gyeonggi-gun of Gyeonggi-gun divided from the said J land (hereinafter referred to as the “instant land”).

3) Meanwhile, on January 16, 1927, the Plaintiff’s prior deceased in Jincheon-gun M, Jincheon-gun N, and on January 16, 1927, the deceased in Jincheon-gun N, and on October 7, 1965, the deceased in the deceased on October 7, 1965, jointly inherited the Plaintiffs’ share in the claims. [In the absence of any dispute over the grounds for recognition, Gap’s evidence Nos. 1 through 7, and 10, the purport of the entire pleadings, all of the arguments, and the purport of the whole arguments.

B. The land before the Plaintiff’s assertion and judgment 1 is the land which was acquired at the original time under the circumstances of the Plaintiff’s P, and the Plaintiffs are the successors of the network P, so the land divided from the land before the instant partition is owned by the Plaintiffs. The registration of preservation of ownership in the name of the Defendant Innju as to the land of this case is the registration of invalidity of cause, and therefore, the Defendant Innju City is the purport of the claim among the land of this case.