1. All of the plaintiff's claims are dismissed.

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

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff completed the registration of ownership transfer on July 27, 2012 on the forest land stated in the purport of the claim that was jointly owned by D and four others (hereinafter “instant land”).

B. The land of this case has a grave, dumpstones, and dumpstones attached thereto, as stated in the purport of the claim, and the above grave (hereinafter “current grave”) has a parent of the Defendants (the Defendant is a punishment system).

C. The original land of this case, at a different location from the present grave on August 1976, and around March 1987, the Plaintiff’s mother was set up with the Defendants’ her fry around March 1987 (hereinafter “absent grave”). The land of this case and its surrounding areas were installed with the Defendants’ grandparents and leb parents’ graves.

On November 24, 2013, one of the co-sellers selling the instant land and its surrounding land, and five degree D, the Defendants’ five degree D excavated the past grave without the Defendants’ consent. At the time, the Defendants, who became aware of this, reported to the police, prevented the Plaintiff from doing so and recovered remains, and then buried the remains of the parents on November 27, 201 and then installed the grave at present.

In this regard, D was sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor for 10 months for the crime of excavating a grave and sentenced to a two-year suspended sentence.

(Reasons for recognition) Gap 1, 5, 10, 2, 7, 9, 13 evidence, Eul 13, the video and the purport of the whole pleadings, as shown in the evidence Nos. 2014 Goju District Court 2014 Godan323, 2014No909

2. According to the above facts of recognition, barring any special circumstance, the Defendants (the ownership of a tomb belongs to the person presiding over the grave. The Plaintiff filed the instant claim against the Defendants on the premise that the Defendants are currently the owners of the grave, and the Defendants asserted that they are currently the owners of the grave. Therefore, the Defendants are currently the owners of the grave), who are the owners of the land of this case, remove the grave at present and remove the grave, etc. from the land of this case including the base thereof.