1. The plaintiff's claims against the defendants are all dismissed.

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

1. Basic facts

A. On June 22, 1954, F completed the registration of ownership transfer due to the restoration with respect to the forest E- 26,165 square meters in Gangseo-gun, Gangwon-do on June 22, 1954 (hereinafter “instant land”). Defendant B, the F’s wife, died on December 17, 1998, completed the registration of ownership transfer due to an inheritance by consultation and division with respect to the said land on August 25, 200.

B. Defendant D purchased the instant land from Defendant B on June 22, 2016, and completed the registration of ownership transfer on June 28, 2016.

[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, each entry of Gap evidence 1 (including virtual number), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination as to the cause of action

A. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion is that the instant land owned by G, the Plaintiff’s son, the Plaintiff’s Ha, and the Plaintiff lawfully inherited and managed the instant land. The Plaintiff’s son and F, the Defendant’s fifth degree of lodging, without any authority, completed registration of preservation of ownership of the instant land. Based on the above registration, each registration of ownership transfer in the name of the Defendants was completed.

Therefore, registration of preservation of ownership in the F’s name on the instant land should be cancelled by the invalidation of the cause, and the registration of transfer of the Defendants’ ownership should also be cancelled.

B. Determination 1) Unless it is proven that a person who has completed registration of preservation of ownership due to recovery after the registration was destroyed or lost, a third party was aware of the relevant land, or there is another person who has filed registration of preservation of ownership on the register before the destruction or loss (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 95Da28601, 28618, Dec. 26, 1995). 2) The fact that G and the Plaintiff’s parents have installed seedlings on the instant land, the Plaintiff’s attached H and the Plaintiff resided in the neighboring area of the instant land, and the Plaintiff cultivated part of the said land may be acknowledged by witness I and the J’s testimony.

However, in light of the legal principles as seen earlier, the above.