1. It is confirmed that each land listed in the separate sheet is owned by Defendant C;

2. Defendant C:

A. Attached to the Plaintiff A.

1. Indication of the claim for determination as to the claim against Defendant C: as shown in the grounds for the claim in the attached Form;

Judgment by public notice (Article 208 (3) 3 of the Civil Procedure Act)

2. Defendant Republic of Korea’s claim against Defendant Republic of Korea asserts that there is no benefit in confirmation. As such, Defendant Republic of Korea’s claim against the State for the confirmation of land ownership against the State is unregistered and the land is neither the registrant nor the registrant is identified on the land cadastre or the forest land cadastre, and there is a benefit in confirmation only in special circumstances, such as the State’s refusal of ownership by a third party, and the State’s continued to assert ownership (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2009Da48633, Oct. 15, 2009). Defendant Republic of Korea’s assertion that each of the lands listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “each of the instant lands”) is indicated in the former land cadastre and address as indicated in the separate sheet (hereinafter “D”), which is the name and address of “D”, and it is difficult to determine who the registrant is, because there is no accurate address, date of birth, resident registration number, etc., of each of the instant lands against Defendant Republic of Korea. Therefore, the Plaintiffs do not accept the aforementioned assertion against Defendant Republic of Korea.

In full view of the overall purport of the arguments in Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 7, it is reasonable to view that defendant C is the same person as D on the old land cadastre of each of the lands of this case.

Therefore, it is confirmed that each land of this case is owned by Defendant C.

3. Conclusion, the Plaintiff’s claim against the Defendants is accepted in entirety.