1. The plaintiffs' claims against the defendants are all dismissed.

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

1. On December 5, 1933, the plaintiff clans asserted that the plaintiff clans claimed in this case entrusted the name of 1/4 shares to the clan N,O, P, and Q on the 1/4 shares of the forest land M 18 m2 (hereinafter "land before the division and registration conversion") in the case of Kim Jong-si, the clans owned by the defendant, and completed the registration of ownership transfer.

On July 20, 2012, the land before the division and registration conversion was divided into the land No. 1 and R forest land No. 2678 square meters, and on the same day, the said RR land was converted into the land No. 2 (hereinafter “each of the instant land”) in the instant case (hereinafter “each of the instant land”).

Plaintiff

A clan held an extraordinary general meeting on June 22, 2013 and terminated the title trust of each of the instant lands, and the land No. 1 of this case decided to complete the registration of ownership transfer in the name of the Plaintiff clan and the land No. 2 of this case in the name of Plaintiff B.

On the other hand, N died on June 17, 1932, O on March 26, 1962, Q on February 7, 1979, respectively, and Defendant C was a child of Q. The rest of the Defendants are children of Q.

Therefore, the Defendants are obliged to implement the registration procedure for transfer of ownership on the ground of termination of title trust with respect to each inheritance share among the land No. 1 of this case to the Plaintiff clans, and with respect to each inheritance share among the land No. 2 of this case to the Plaintiff B

2. The judgment of the court below is not sufficient to recognize the fact that the plaintiff clan title trust was made to the members N, etc. on December 5, 1993 the land before the division and registration conversion (each of the land of this case) owned by the defendant clan on December 5, 1993, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it.

Therefore, the plaintiffs' assertion is without merit.

3. In conclusion, the plaintiffs' claims against the defendants are dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.