1. The Defendant’s deposit withdrawal claim amounting to KRW 18,216,80,00 deposited as the 2016-1543 of the Gwangju District Court’s Netcheon Branch.

1. Basic facts

A. The registration of ownership transfer was completed on May 13, 1980 under the name of C ( Address: Inncheon-gun D) on May 13, 1980 for the land of 512 square meters (hereinafter “instant land”).

B. As to the instant land, the Defendant completed the registration of ownership transfer on June 29, 2016 due to the land expropriation conducted on June 27, 2016, and deposited KRW 18,216,80 as Gwangju District Court Decision 201, Jun. 24, 2016, by designating the deposited person as “C (resident address D)” as the deposited person on June 24, 2016.

C. Meanwhile, on the other hand, C (the address as of May 13, 1980, which was registered in the name of C: the address as of May 13, 1980, which was registered in the name of C) of the Plaintiff, died on December 20, 202 and succeeded solely by the Plaintiff.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 3, 18, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion is that the Plaintiff is the sole heir of C, who was the owner of the instant land, and thus, the Plaintiff’s claim for payment of the instant deposit money.

B. The defendant asserts that the lawsuit of this case is unlawful as there is no benefit of confirmation, since the plaintiff can claim the withdrawal of the deposit money against the depositer by proving that the depositer is his heir, and even if the depositer does not accept it, the claim of this case is not accepted.

On the other hand, in the case of this case where the defendant deposited the compensation for expropriation on the ground of the absolute uncertainty of the person entitled to receive the compensation, the legal status of the plaintiff should be deemed to exist, and even on the deposit system, the plaintiff, who is the right holder of the expropriated land, has obtained the confirmation that the claim for payment of the deposit, the absolute probability of deposit, belongs to himself/herself, and the judgment becomes final and conclusive, the plaintiff may receive the payment of the deposit by submitting the original copy of the judgment to the deposit office, along with the written claim for payment of the deposit. Thus, the lawsuit of this case is surrounding the withdrawal of deposit of the deposit, the absolute uncertainty of which