1. The defendant on October 12, 1957, with respect to the plaintiff with respect to the 99 square meters in Gyeonggi-gun B Seo-gu, Gyeonggi-do.

1. Facts of recognition;

가. 일제강점기에 작성된 토지조사부에는 고양군 C계(高陽郡 C契)에 주소를 둔 D가 대정3년(1914년)

4. At the time of May, 15, it is indicated that the Gyeong-gun E, Gyeonggi-do 51 square meters, 629 square meters, 629 square meters, 1,269 square meters, 1,269 square meters, 2,916 square meters, 2,916 square meters, and 2,022 square meters (hereinafter “instant situation land”) in Gyeonggi-do, Pyeongtaek-gun, Gyeonggi-do (hereinafter “instant assessment land”).

B. The assessment land of the instant case was divided by division, conversion of the area, and change of administrative district, and the land was part of the land indicated in the attached Table 1 List of Land (hereinafter “instant dispute land”). The registration of preservation of ownership in the name of the Defendant was completed as to the land in the instant dispute, as indicated in the registration status of preservation of ownership in attached Table 2.

C. On June 1, 1921, when the Plaintiff’s prior domicile on a certified copy of the family register was changed to M, the legal domicile of the Plaintiff was changed to Goyang-gun in Gyeonggi-do. On June 1, 1921, O (O and P) succeeded to the property of J. On October 31, 1981, the spouse and children succeeded to the said property. The Plaintiff is one of the co-inheritors with O’s children.

경기도 고양군 Q계, C계는 행정구역 변경으로 1914. 4. 1. 경기도 고양군 R리가 되었다가, 1936. 4. 1. 경성부 S정(S町), 1943. 6. 10. 서대문구 S정, 1944. 10. 23. 마포구 S정, 1946. 10. 1. 서울 마포구 T동으로 각 명칭이 변경되었다.

【Ground for recognition】 The fact that there has been no dispute, each entry of Gap's 1 through 13 (including virtual numbers) and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Summary of the parties' arguments;

A. Since D, the title holder of the circumstances as seen earlier, and J, the Plaintiff’s preference, are the same, the Plaintiff jointly succeeded to the land in the dispute of this case divided from the land in the assessment of this case, and as seen earlier, the registration of preservation of ownership in the Defendant’s name, which was completed with respect to the land above, shall be cancelled by the registration of invalidation of the cause. Thus, the Plaintiff’s co-ownership