1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

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

1. We examine, ex officio, whether the instant lawsuit is lawful or not, ex officio, as to the determination on the legitimacy of the instant lawsuit.

The claim for the confirmation of land ownership against the State shall be limited to the cases where the land is unregistered and there is no registered titleholder on the land cadastre or the forest land cadastre, or the identity of the registered titleholder is unknown, and where there are special circumstances, such as where the State denies the ownership of a third party who is the registered titleholder, and the State continues to claim the ownership.

(2) In light of the purport of the entire pleadings in the statement No. 3, 1995, the ownership transfer registration is completed in the name of C, D, and E with respect to part of the portion of the forest land in this case (hereinafter “the forest land in this case”) in the written reply from September 14, 1993, and the defendant asserted that “the ownership of the forest in this case exists to the plaintiff,” but the defendant did not assert that “the ownership of the forest in this case exists to the defendant,” and that each of the above facts is not owned to the defendant, who is the claimant of this case. According to each of the above acknowledged facts, the defendant is not entitled to ownership of the forest in this case, and the land in this case is not owned to the defendant, and the defendant is not entitled to ownership of the forest in this case. The defendant is not entitled to ownership of the forest in this case.

2. In conclusion, the lawsuit of this case is unlawful and thus, it is so decided as per Disposition.