1. All appeals filed by the plaintiffs are dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal are assessed against the Plaintiffs.

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

1. The reasons for the court's explanation of this case are as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for the addition of the following "2. Additional Judgment" as to the allegations added by the plaintiffs in this court, and thus, they are quoted as it is in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. In addition, the Plaintiffs received the assessment of the land of W, X, Y, and Z during the Japanese colonial era by N residing in Gyeonggi-gun M, and on January 19, 1935, AA, which was inherited by the Plaintiffs T on January 19, 1935, completed the registration of preservation of ownership of each of the above land. In light of these circumstances, the Plaintiffs asserted that N and the Plaintiffs T same person, who are the names of the circumstances of the instant land, are the same.

In full view of the purport of each statement in the evidence No. 19-1 to No. 5 of the above land, the title holder of the situation of each of the above land was N residing in Gyeonggi-gun M as well as the land of this case, and the fact that registration of preservation of ownership has been made in the name of AA on January 19, 1935 with respect to each of the above land on each of the above land. However, unless there is no evidence to acknowledge that AA inherited from the plaintiffs' fleet T and completed registration of preservation of ownership, it is insufficient to recognize that N, the title holder of the situation of the land of this case, as the land of this case, and there is no evidence to prove otherwise, the plaintiffs' assertion is not acceptable.

3. In conclusion, the plaintiffs' claims are dismissed as all of them are without merit, and the judgment of the court of first instance is just in conclusion, and the plaintiffs' appeal is dismissed.