1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Determination on the cause of the claim

A. According to the purport of Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 61 (including paper numbers) and the whole arguments, Yang-gun-gun-gun-gun-gun-si-si-si-si-si-si-si-si-si-si-si-si-si-si-si-based-based-based-based-based-based-based-based-based-based-based-based-based-based-based-based-based-based-based-based-based-based-based-based-based-based-based-based-based-based-based-based-based-based-based-based-based-based-based-based-based-based-based-based-based-based-based-based-based-based-based-based-based-based-based-based-based-based-based-based-based-based-based-based-based-based-based-based-based-based-based-based-based-based-based-based-based-based-based-based-based-based-based-based-based-based-based-based-based-based-based-based-based-based-based-based-based-based-based-based-based-based-based-based-based-based-based-

B. In the absence of counter-proofs, such as the change of the situation by the adjudication, the person registered in the Land Survey Book is presumed to be the owner of the land, and the circumstances are presumed to have become final and conclusive. Thus, the presumption of preservation of ownership becomes void, unless a person other than the holder of the preservation registration is found to have received the situation of the relevant land, and the registered titleholder fails to assert the fact of acquisition by specific succession (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 95Da4654, 46661, May 23, 1997; 96Da16247, Jun. 28, 1996). In the instant case, health class, health class, and health class, the fact that the title titleholder of the instant real estate was the Plaintiff’s prior owner D, does not seem to have changed the situation of the network D by the adjudication, and therefore, the real estate in this case is the real estate.