1. It is confirmed that real estate recorded in the separate sheet between the Plaintiff and the Defendant is owned by the Plaintiff.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be.

1. Basic facts

A. The land survey division prepared during the Japanese occupation point period is indicated as being subject to the assessment of C’s real estate indicated in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant real estate”).

B. The instant land is currently indicated as “land to be restored by the landowner” in the current unregistered state.

C. Meanwhile, as of July 13, 1942, C, who was removed from the military register in Namyang-si, died on July 13, 194, and succeeded to his own property as the family heir, E, who was his wife, died on May 10, 1968 and succeeded to the property jointly by himself, F, G, and the Plaintiff, who was his wife, but the F, died on January 7, 1995, and the adjudication of declaration of disappearance on G became final and conclusive, the Plaintiff inherited the said property solely.

【Facts without any dispute, Gap’s evidence Nos. 1 through 7, Eul’s evidence No. 4, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Since the judgment of the defendant on the defense prior to the merits entered the plaintiff's previous lawsuit against the defendant (Seoul Central District Court Decision 2010DaDa473943)'s intent to waive the plaintiff's claim against the land of this case, the plaintiff's claim of this case is unlawful as it is contrary to the res judicata of the above protocol.

The evidence Nos. 1 through 4 alone is insufficient to recognize the above facts, and it is not sufficient to acknowledge the defendant's above facts. Rather, according to the evidence No. 8, the plaintiff's withdrawal of the claim against the land of this case is recognized in the above lawsuit. Thus, the defendant's prior defense on the merits is without merit.

3. Determination on the cause of the claim

A. The claim for the confirmation of land ownership against the country where the benefit of confirmation exists is unregistered and the land is not known to the person who registered the land cadastre, and the State denies the ownership of a third party who is the person who registered the land and continues to assert the ownership of the State.