1. The plaintiff's request for the cancellation registration of ownership transfer and appeal as to the claim for unjust enrichment.

1. The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance cited in the instant case is as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance except for partial dismissal as follows. Thus, this is acceptable in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

[Supplementary part] Under the second part of the judgment of the court of first instance, the "land specified in attached Table 1" in the fifth sentence shall be added to "land specified in attached Table 1".

In the third part of the judgment of the first instance, "720.644m2" shall be added to "the land indicated in the attached Form 2" to be attached to the second part below.

In the first instance judgment, the part of the "(b) concerning the claim for the registration of ownership transfer of 720.6644m2 among the roads under the Land Readjustment Project Act" shall be deleted from the first to 18m.

No. 5 of the judgment of the first instance court, "(c) with respect to a claim for return of unjust enrichment" shall be applied to "(b) with respect to a claim for transfer of ownership and a claim for return of unjust enrichment with respect to the land listed in the attached Form 2 indicated in the

2. In conclusion, the plaintiff's lawsuit concerning the claim for the cancellation of ownership transfer registration procedure is unlawful and dismissed, and the claim for the cancellation of unjust enrichment is dismissed as it is without merit. Since the part concerning each of the above claims in the judgment of the court of first instance is just in conclusion, the plaintiff's appeal is dismissed as it is without merit, and the plaintiff's claim for the cancellation of ownership transfer registration procedure changed in the court of first instance is dismissed