1. Revocation of a judgment of the first instance;

2. The Defendant’s cadastral resurvey (B) against the Plaintiff on May 21, 2014.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. As the Special Act on Cadastral Resurvey (hereinafter “CB”) was completely implemented on March 17, 2012, the Incheon Metropolitan City has designated 445 lots of land (hereinafter “B district”) located in the Incheon Cheongjin-gun, Incheon, including the land C (hereinafter “instant land”) owned by the Plaintiff as the cadastral resurvey project district, and the Defendant, the project implementer, was implementing the cadastral resurvey project in the B district.

B. From October 2012 to February 2, 2013, the Defendant completed the land survey and the cadastral resurvey survey in B, and notified the land owners including the Plaintiff of the results of the cadastral resurvey around August 2013.

C. On May 21, 2014, the Defendant issued a boundary determination on the instant land and B areas (hereinafter “instant boundary determination”) to the Plaintiff on May 21, 2014, and notified the Plaintiff of the boundary determination.

On June 2014, the Plaintiff filed an objection against the boundary determination that the building on the instant land was in the direction of sea, and that it was abutting on the roadway, which is the seaside, and thus, the Plaintiff filed an objection against the boundary determination that the boundary is restored. However, on September 3, 2014, the Vindication Military Boundary Determination Committee dismissed the Plaintiff’s objection.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1 through 3 (including branch numbers for those with additional numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply), Eul evidence 1 to 10, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. The Plaintiff’s boundary determination by the cadastral resurvey project is aimed at correcting cadastral records inconsistent with the actual state. The boundary determination by the Plaintiff’s claim is to be made by including the part of the instant land into another person’s land, which could flow into the seaside road, was illegally occupied, and thereby, the passage to the road ceases to exist. As a result, the boundary determination is inconsistent with the actual state.