1. The part concerning the claim for confirmation of ownership among the instant lawsuit is dismissed.

2. The plaintiff's remaining claims are dismissed.

3...

1. Basic facts

A. On April 27, 1923, the copy of the register of the real estate concerning the land of this case was registered as D on January 10, 1923 under the name of 3176, which had the address in Chungcheongnam-gun budget-gun, the registration office of Suwon District Court received on April 27, 1923, and the registration of transfer of ownership was completed on October 30, 197, and D on the land cadastre drafted on October 30, 1976, as D on April 27, 1937.

B. E and F had legal couple G, H, I, and the Plaintiff as their children, and E and F died on April 10, 1989, while F died on April 15, 1972.

C. G paid the aggregate land tax, etc. imposed on the instant land from around 1999 to around 2009, and on March 20, 2017, the Plaintiff decided to acquire the ownership of the instant land through the division of inherited property among heirs.

The Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against D on July 17, 2017 against Suwon District Court 2017dan510177, but the Plaintiff withdrawn the lawsuit on July 17, 2017 because the location of D cannot be known.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 5 through 8, 10 (including paper numbers), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The Plaintiff’s assertion that: (a) purchased the instant land from D before approximately 40-50 years ago; and (b) occupied the instant land from around that time until the death; and (c) since the death of E, the inheritor occupied the instant land.

Therefore, the Plaintiff, as the inheritor, shall be deemed to have the right to claim ownership transfer registration due to the purchase and sale of D or the completion of the prescription period for the acquisition of D. Since D, as a J, does not recognize the presumption of right as to the owner of register and land cadastre, it is sought against the Defendant to confirm the ownership of the instant land and to cancel the ownership transfer registration under D name.

3. Determination on the defense prior to the merits

A. The defendant asserts that the part on the claim for confirmation of ownership among the lawsuit of this case is unlawful as there is no benefit of confirmation.

(b) against the State;