1. Each of 4/16 shares of the 519 square meters of the 519 square meters of the wife population H in Chungcheongnam-si each of the plaintiffs A, B, C, and 1/16 shares of the plaintiffs D, E, F, and G.

1. Basic facts

A. The land survey book is written by the “J” with the domicile of 519 square meters (157 square meters; hereinafter the “instant land”) prior to the wife population H in Yong-si (hereinafter the “instant land”) on December 25, 1911 (short-term 4244).

B. The instant land is unregistered until now.

C. On December 8, 1938, the “L”, the permanent domicile of which was established in “Y”, died and succeeded to the property of M, who was inherited by Australia, and M, upon the death of July 10, 1995, succeeded to the property of each of 1/4 shares of N, Plaintiff A, B, and C (O, the spouse of M, died around 1978), and N, on April 6, 2015, the inheritance shares of the Plaintiff D, E, F, and G, each of whose children were their children, succeeded to the property of each of 1/4 shares.

(N's spouse P was killed in around 1992). D.

Ultimately, L’s property was inherited to Plaintiff A, B, and C each 4/16 shares, Plaintiff D, E, F, and G each 1/16 shares.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1 to Gap evidence 4-3, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The following circumstances, which are acknowledged by comprehensively taking account of the results of the fact-finding on Q pages of this court’s evidence and the purport of the entire pleadings, namely, the fact-finding on the land of this case and the names of J and J, the title of which are the circumstances indicated in the land investigation register of this case, are the same (R), the address of J, the title of which is the Plaintiff, and the address of J, the title of which is the Plaintiff, K in the situation where the permanent domicile of L, the title of which is the Plaintiff, is permissible. In light of the fact that there is no evidence to deem that there was no other person than the Plaintiff’s prior resident, and that there was no evidence to deem that a third party asserted ownership on the land of this case, it is reasonable to deem that J, the title of the circumstances indicated in the land investigation register of the Plaintiff and the land of this case

On the other hand, a person registered in the Land Survey Board as an owner has no counter-proofs such as changes in the contents of the situation by adjudication.