1. The defendant confirms that the 69m2 of Suwon-si B road is owned by the plaintiff.

2. The costs of the lawsuit are assessed against the defendant.

1. Facts of recognition;

(a) In the Land Survey Book drawn up during the Japanese occupation point period, the full-time 21 square meters are written in Suwon-gun C, E with the address adjacent to the above C.

B. Around 1936, the land was changed to B 21 square meters prior to the same Myeon, and the land category was changed to a road on December 27, 1954, and the area converted to the area on May 14, 197 was changed to 69 square meters. According to the change of administrative jurisdiction, the land was changed to the area on July 1, 198, the area was changed to the area on which 69 square meters was changed to the area on July 1, 198, Suwon-gu, Suwon-si B road on November 24, 2003, and was changed to the final area on November 24, 2003 (hereinafter “instant land”).

C. The instant land is unregistered, and the owner’s current land cadastre column is written in E.

On November 1, 1959, G, the head of the Namnam FF, who had died at the time of the death of the Plaintiff’s family member, succeeded to the inheritance by proxy, and thereafter G died on July 5, 1967 and succeeded to the Plaintiff’s Ha who was an siblings.

After that, H died on November 6, 2012, and jointly succeeded to inheritance by Plaintiff I, J, K, and L, who are his/her spouse, children. As to the instant land, five heirs of H, on September 25, 2014, entered into an agreement on the division of inherited property with the content that the instant land was owned solely by the Plaintiff.

【Ground of recognition】 The fact that there has been no dispute, entry of Gap 1 through 10 (including each number in case of additional number) and the purport of whole pleading

2. A person registered as the owner in the land investigation division for the cause of the claim shall be presumed to have been determined by considering the situation as the owner of the land, unless there is any counter-proof such as the change of the situation by the adjudication, etc., and the situation shall be presumed to have been determined. E and the plaintiff's increase in the situation of the land in this case shall be the same as the one in whose name the name was the same, and even if there were other persons, it seems to be

Therefore, the land in this case was originally acquired by E, the plaintiff as a title holder of assessment, and the land in this case was independently acquired by the plaintiff.