1. All appeals filed by the plaintiffs are dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal are assessed against the Plaintiffs.

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

1. The reasoning of the court's explanation concerning this case is as follows: "the judgment on the main defense of the judgment of the court of first instance on the ground of the judgment of the court of first instance on the ground of "2." (No. 19-4 of the judgment of the court of first instance on the ground of appeal No. 3)" (No. 3 of the judgment of the court of first instance on the ground of the judgment on the ground of the judgment of the court of first instance,

2. Parts to be dried;

A. Defendant E is a claim for cancellation of ownership transfer registration against part (A) of the land on one parcel, which connects each point of (a), 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, and 1 among the real estate listed in the attached Table 10 among the real estate listed in the attached Table 10 among the land listed in the attached Table 2 in the attached Table No. 2, and as a claim for cancellation of ownership transfer registration against part (a) of the land on one parcel, it cannot be registered because it is inconsistent with the indication of the right to claim cancellation registration and the indication of the real estate register

B. In a lawsuit seeking ownership transfer registration or cancellation of the portion corresponding to the former parcel number which ceased to exist as a result of annexation among the land combined, if the object of the claim was specified as the former parcel number and the land register before the annexation without using the measurement drawing capable of dividing it, such a claim cannot be deemed as unlawful since it cannot be deemed that the object of the registration is specified specifically and thus, it cannot be deemed as having been made possible. However, if the object of the claim is specified by the measurement drawing capable of dividing it by the time of the closing of argument at the trial court at the latest

(Supreme Court Decision 2009Da42017 Decided September 10, 2009 and Supreme Court Decision 97Da2993 Decided June 24, 1997).

In light of the above legal principles, in full view of the purport of the entire pleadings as a result of the commission of surveying and appraisal by the Vice-Governor of the first instance court and the Incheon Vice-Governor of the National Land Information Corporation, the above (A) part of the real estate in the annexed Table 10, which the plaintiffs sought cancellation registration, is the real estate part before annexation, after the merger, based on the survey