beta
Text
1. All of the plaintiffs' claims are dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiffs.
Reasons
1. Facts of recognition;
A. On March 29, 1965, the registration of ownership transfer was completed on August 5, 1965 on the closed register on the land listed in paragraph (1) of the attached Table No. 1 of the attached Table, and on the share of 200/419 of the above land, the registration of ownership transfer was completed in Pyeongtaek-gun.
B. The land indicated in paragraph (1) of the attached list was divided into the land indicated in paragraph (2) of the attached list and the land indicated in paragraph (2) of the attached Table into 937 square meters due to the partition of co-owned property, and the ownership transfer registration was completed in H on December 18, 1982 as the receipt No. 35385 on December 18, 1982.
C. On October 9, 200, the land listed in the attached list No. 2 was inherited by a consultation division on October 9, 200, and the registration of ownership transfer was completed on June 29, 2007 by the Suwon District Court No. 38012, which was received on June 29, 2007, and on September 4, 2007, the registration of ownership transfer was completed on September 11, 2007, which was received on September 50640.
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 4-2, Eul evidence 2-C, the purport of the whole pleadings
2. The land indicated in paragraph (1) of the attached Table No. 1 of the plaintiffs' assertion was not divided from the Gyeonggi Authenticity-gun (Seoul-gun was changed to Pyeongtaek-gun around 1938 and around around 1995 to Pyeongtaek-gun), and the registration of ownership transfer in the name of H, Defendant F, and Defendant G’s name is entirely null and void, on the basis of the land cadastre created without any ground for overlapped location with the above land, and the registration of ownership transfer in the name of H as to the land listed in paragraph (1) of the attached Table No. 1, and the registration of ownership transfer in the name of Pyeongtaek-gun as to the land listed in paragraph (2) of the attached Table No. 2 divided from the land listed in the attached Table No. 1 of the attached Table No. 1 of the plaintiffs’ assertion.
Therefore, the Plaintiffs, the heir of the network N, who was considered to have the land of this case, are Defendant F, I, J, and K, the heir of H, with respect to each of the above registrations in the H’s name.