1. Defendant B is the reason for the Plaintiff’s sale on September 21, 198 with respect to the land size of 540 square meters in Changwon-si, Changwon-si C forest land of 540 square meters.

1. The Plaintiff’s assertion that the real estate of this case was assessed is E, Defendant B’s protocol.

The plaintiff purchased the real estate of this case from the defendant Eul who solely succeeded to the real estate of this case from the defendant Eul. The defendant Republic of Korea seeks confirmation that the real estate of this case is owned by the defendant Eul, and the defendant Eul seeks implementation of the procedure for transfer registration of ownership of this case.

2. Determination on the claim against Defendant Republic of Korea

A. (1) The summary of the Defendant Republic of Korea’s assertion is that the Defendant Republic of Korea denies the ownership of D, the title holder of the registration, or does not assert state ownership, and thus there is no benefit to seek confirmation of ownership against the Defendant Republic of Korea.

(2) The claim for confirmation of land ownership against the country of judgment is unregistered, and there is no registered titleholder on the land cadastre or forest land cadastre, or the identity of the registered titleholder is unknown, and there is a benefit of confirmation in special circumstances, such as where the State continuously denies the ownership of a third party who is a registered titleholder, and where there is a special circumstance, such as

(See Supreme Court Decision 94Da27649 delivered on September 15, 1995, etc.). The fact that there is no dispute, and according to Gap evidence No. 1, the real estate of this case is unregistered, and it is recognized that D is the owner in the forest land register, and the defendant Republic of Korea denies the plaintiff's assertion that the owner of the real estate of this case is the same person D and defendant B in the forest land register. Thus, the plaintiff has a benefit to seek confirmation of ownership of the real estate of this case against the defendant Republic of Korea.

Therefore, the defendant's main defense is without merit.

B. The plaintiff's claim seeking confirmation is without merit, since there is no evidence to acknowledge that the plaintiff is the same person as D and defendant B, the owner in the forest land register of the real estate of this case, and the plaintiff's claim seeking confirmation.

3. Defendant.