1. It shall be confirmed that the real estate stated in the attached Form is owned by the plaintiff;

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by each person;

1. Determination on the defense prior to the merits

A. The defendant's assertion is unlawful because the defendant is not a party to a dispute over the ownership of a building listed in the attached Form (hereinafter "the instant house"), but does not dispute over the ownership of the instant house. Thus, the instant lawsuit is unlawful as there is no benefit of confirmation.

B. Determination 1) Where a building ledger is created but another person is registered as the owner, or where the owner in the building ledger is in blank space, or it is impossible to identify the owner due to some omission in the owner’s indication, the claimant who asserts that he/she is the owner of the building may apply for registration of ownership preservation by proving ownership by judgment pursuant to Article 65 subparag. 2 of the Registration of Real Estate Act (see Supreme Court Decision 2009Da93428, Nov. 10, 201). Furthermore, the party to the lawsuit seeking ownership verification of a building unregistered as the inherent office of the Si/Gun/Gu, which is the relevant local government, is the said local government (see Supreme Court Decision 9Da2188, May 28, 199); according to the purport of the Plaintiff’s entry in the B-1 through 3 in the house ledger and the entire pleadings, the Plaintiff’s registration number was not entered in the house ledger or the land register for the year in which it is difficult to register the ownership of the building for 197 years from 197.