beta
Text
1. The defendant shall assign 3/25 shares in the appointed party C, the plaintiff (appointed party) and the appointed party D. for the real estate stated in the attached list.
Reasons
1. The following facts do not conflict between the parties, or are acknowledged in full view of Gap evidence 2, Gap evidence 5-1 to 3, Gap evidence 6, Gap evidence 7, Gap evidence 8, and Gap evidence 9, and the whole purport of the pleadings, and there is no counter-proof.
Attached Form
On January 1, 1916, the land cadastre drawn up in the Japanese colonial period with respect to the real estate listed in the list (hereinafter “instant real estate”) is indicated as being the owner of the non-partyO who resides in N on January 1, 1916.
B. The Republic of Korea Hongcheon-gun P died on May 3, 1961, and Non-Party A succeeded to Non-Party A and Non-Party A, the spouse of Non-Party A and Non-Party A, the spouse of Non-Party A, and Non-Party A died on February 15, 1975 and succeeded to Non-Party A, the child of Non-Party A.
C. On February 16, 2016, Non-Party A died, and became his/her respective successors, C, children, Appointee C, E, F, Plaintiff (Appointed Party (hereinafter “Plaintiff”), Selection G, H, I, K, K, L, and M.
2. Determination
A. The Plaintiff’s assertion is the Plaintiff’s real estate owned by Nonparty Q, the father’s father, and Nonparty A succeeded to the real estate. Nonparty A died and the Plaintiff and the designated parties succeeded to the real estate. As such, the Plaintiff and the designated parties sought confirmation on the instant real estate as the owner of each inheritance share.
B. The defendant's defense of this case is a defense to the effect that the plaintiff's lawsuit of this case does not have a benefit in confirmation. Thus, the plaintiff's claim for confirmation of land ownership against the State is unregistered and the land is not registered in the land cadastre or the forest land cadastre, or the registrant is unknown, and there is a benefit in confirmation only in special circumstances, such as the state's continued refusal of ownership by a third party who is a person registered or registered, and there is no benefit in confirmation
Supreme Court Decision 201No. 11. 11.