1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. Basic facts

A. The Land Survey Book of the Japanese Occupation Period is indicated as follows: ① as to the land Survey Book of the Japanese Occupation Period, ② as to the Female-gun B of the Female-gun of Gyeonggi-do (the land of this case No. 1); ② as to the female-gun of the Gyeonggi-do, the land No. 688 square meters (the land of this case No. 2) is written as being under the circumstances.

B. (1) Attached Form 205 square meters in the land of this case, which is the Fluju City Do 205 square meters

1. It is the land listed in the list 1:

Land after the division of this case 1

(1) The name of the defendant of November 13, 1957 shall be attached in the name of the defendant after division.

2. The registration of preservation of ownership in the list 1 has been made, and 2. The attached Form 1451 square meters prior to G at the time of leisure in the land of this case.

1. It is the land listed in Schedule 2:

Land after the division of this case 2

(1) The name of the defendant of November 13, 1957 shall be attached in the name of the defendant after division.

2. A registration of preservation of ownership was made in the list 2.

C. Meanwhile, on July 15, 1955, I, the permanent domicile and the place of death of the Sinju-gun in Gyeonggi-do, died and succeeded to his own property by the KJ in its sole possession. On September 30, 1968, J, as the date of death due to the expiration of the period of disappearance on September 30, 1968, became co-inheritors.

[Ground of recognition] 1, 2, 3-1 to 5, and 5 of evidence Nos. 2 and 4

2. With respect to the Plaintiff’s assertion 1, 2 land, each registration of preservation of ownership in the Defendant’s name, which was made with respect to the instant land 1, 2, should be cancelled as the ground for invalidation, on the ground that each registration of preservation of ownership in the Defendant’s name, shall be cancelled as the ground for invalidation, in the case of a prop report prepared at the time of enforcement of the former Farmland Reform Act (repealed by Act No. 4817, Dec. 2, 1994; hereinafter the former Farmland Reform Act).

As one of the co-inheritorss with respect to the instant 1 and 2 land, the Plaintiff sought the cancellation of each registration of preservation of ownership in the name of the Defendant as an act of preservation of the jointly-owned property.

3. Determination

A. According to the statements in Gap evidence 1 and Eul evidence 3, the Gu is as follows.