1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Basic facts

A. The entry in the forest survey report and the Defendant’s registration of preservation of ownership (1) written forest survey report on the forest survey report on the Ginju-gun of Gyeonggi-do, which was drafted during the Japanese colonial era, are indicated as the fact that F residing in the G G on April 1920 (eight years in 1920) was inspected on the said G land. From the above G, H was divided before August 9, 1945, and each of the instant land was subdivided from the above H before the division, and thereafter, the name of the administrative district was changed to G in the Gyeonggi-gun-gun of Gyeonggi-do.

On the other hand, in the forestry register for H land that was restored before the division in 1968, the former owner of the above land was the J, Japan, and on May 19, 1960, the ownership preservation registration was completed under the name of the defendant under the title of the Suwon District Court No. 841 on the same day.

3) After that, the name of the administrative district was changed to the Dong-dong, Gyeonggi-do, Skju-gun, Gyeonggi-do. B. inheritance relationship 1) The Plaintiff’s fleet L had the domicile in the Jongno-gu Seoul P on January 20, 1921, and on July 7, 1923, L, which is the Plaintiff’s fleet M in the Gan-si, the Gan-gun, and the Gan-gun, the Gan-gun, the Gan-gun, and the Gan-gun, the Gan-si, the Gan-si, the Gan-si, the Gan-si, and the Gan-si, the Gan-si, the Gan-si, the Gan-si. On November 10, 1925 (Seoul 14 years) died, and the R inherited Australia as the wife of L on December

2) In addition to R, the said L was only the latter wife, and there was no son, and on August 28, 1907, 1907, U was married with V on August 28, 1907, which was before L’s death, and U died on April 3, 1965. At the time of her death, there was son and five other children.

W was married to X and 4 children including the Plaintiff, and W was dead in 1996 and X in 2000.

[Ground of recognition] The fact that there is no dispute, Gap 1 through 19, Eul 1 through 20 (the plaintiff's assertion that five 5 of the presumption of authenticity has been forged as an official document is not reasonable), the result of each fact-finding reply, the purport of the whole pleadings.

2. Determination as to the cause of action

(a) the name of the defendant;