1. The Defendant confirms that the farmland C cemetery 321 square meters in Geumcheon-gu, Seoul Special Metropolitan City, Jeollabuk-do, Jeollabuk-do is owned by D.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be individually counted.

1. Determination as to the cause of claim

A. Facts of recognition 1) The land indicated in Paragraph 1 of the Disposition (hereinafter “instant land”).

ii) E is written on January 10, 1915 as land cadastre E was written as being examined on January 10, 1915, and the state of non-registration; ii) E dies on March 20, 1927, and D, its south-doe;

F. The birth, the mother G, and the wife solely inherited the instant land while the H inherited Australia. 3) The Plaintiffs filed a lawsuit against D against D seeking the registration of ownership transfer on the instant land due to the completion of prescriptive acquisition at this court (2015Da23729). This court rendered a judgment citing the Plaintiffs’ claims on May 26, 2017.

(hereinafter referred to as “related litigation” and “related judgment”). [Grounds for recognition] without dispute; Gap evidence 1, Gap evidence 4, Gap evidence 9, Gap evidence 12, Gap evidence 13 (including branch numbers), the purport of the whole pleadings.

B. In the absence of counter-proof such as the change of the circumstance, a person whose land was written as the assessment on the land cadastre is presumed to be the owner of the land, and the original acquisition of the land was conducted. According to the above recognition, the instant land became D’s ownership by inheritance, even though the deceased E was originally acquired.

Accordingly, the plaintiffs who have the right to claim the transfer registration of ownership of the land of this case against D by the relevant judgment shall be entitled to seek confirmation against the defendant in subrogation of D.

2. The defendant's assertion is alleged to the effect that the lawsuit of this case overlaps with the related lawsuit, so the case is examined, and there is no evidence to acknowledge it, but rather, according to the facts acknowledged earlier, the lawsuit of this case and related lawsuit of this case are different from the defendant's claim, so the defendant's assertion is without merit.

3. In conclusion, the plaintiffs' claims are justified and they are accepted. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all.