1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

2. The action for the portion of the claim added by this court shall be dismissed.

3. Filing an appeal;

1. The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance is as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for the part where the plaintiff's assertion and its judgment are added, and thus, it shall be quoted in accordance with Article 8 (2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

(2) In addition, the court of first instance that rejected the Plaintiff’s assertion, even if the evidence submitted by the court of first instance and this court is examined, the court of first instance that rejected the Plaintiff’s assertion is justifiable.

A. On May 15, 2006, the result of the boundary restoration supervision of land I located in Gangnam-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government before the Plaintiff’s assertion was decided as appropriate by the regional cadastral committee of Seoul Metropolitan City on June 19, 2007, and thereafter, the result of the boundary restoration of land B as of August 7, 2012 and the decision as to the propriety of the cadastral surveying conducted on July 8, 2013 by the regional cadastral committee of Gangnam-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government.

Nevertheless, on April 30, 2013, the Korea Cadastral Survey Corporation, in violation of the aforementioned survey and resolution, conducted an erroneous survey, such as omitting the paths existing in front of the said land, while re-working the boundary restoration survey on the land B in Gangnam-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government. The decision of the Central Cadastral Committee on the review of cadastral surveying legality on January 9, 2014 was made on the basis of such erroneous survey, and thus illegal.

Therefore, the above decision to review the legality of a cadastral survey is null and void, and the defendant should, if necessary, conduct a survey on the land B, etc. in Gangnam-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government.

B. The Defendant’s determination as to the legitimacy of the instant lawsuit is unlawful, as the previous claim is not in accord with this part of the lawsuit.

As examined earlier, cadastral surveying and its.