1. The Defendant shall receive, on March 10, 2009, Suwon District Court Pyeongtaek-si registry office with respect to the land size of 342 square meters prior to Gyeonggi-si.

1. The following facts are recognized according to the statements (including the paper numbers) in Gap evidence 1 to 7 of the basic facts.

A. According to the Land Survey Book prepared in the Japanese colonial era, it is indicated that the network C was under the assessment of the Gyeonggi-do Authenticity-gun D (former Gyeonggi-do Pyeongtaek-si E) B forest land of 2 parts of the B forest land (hereinafter “land before division”).

B. The land before subdivision was divided into 2,579 square meters prior to Pyeongtaek-si B and 342 square meters prior to B on December 24, 1996 (hereinafter “instant land”) and 2,237 square meters prior to F, following the change of administrative district, unit conversion, etc.

C. As to the instant land, the Defendant completed the registration of ownership preservation as to the Suwon District Court’s Pyeongtaek Branch Registry No. 9988, Mar. 10, 2009.

Upon the death of the deceased C, the deceased G succeeded to Australia, and after the death of the deceased G, the deceased H succeeded to Australia, and the Plaintiff is one of the heirs of the deceased H.

2. According to the above facts of determination, the net C, registered in the Land Survey Book as the owner of the instant land, shall be presumed to have been determined by the circumstances, and the circumstances are presumed to have been determined. As such, the Defendant is obligated to implement the procedure for registration cancellation of the ownership preservation registration of the instant land to the Plaintiff, one of the heirs of the network C, seeking the cancellation of the ownership preservation registration of the instant land as preservation

The defendant asserts that the deceased C, a situation name of the land of this case in the Land Investigation Injury, cannot be readily concluded as the plaintiff's ray C.

However, comprehensively taking account of the overall purport of the pleadings, evidence Nos. 1-1, 2, 5-1, 6-2, and 7-1 through 3 of the evidence Nos. 1-2, 5-1, 6-2, and 7-3 of the evidence Nos. 1-1, 5-2, and 7-1 through 3 of the evidence Nos. 1-3, a copy of the network C or a copy of the network G’s family register in Pyeongtaek-do-si, Gyeonggi-do, or its children, shall not be recorded in the column, but the network C, which is the name of the land of this case, was residing in the Gyeonggi-do Do-