1. The plaintiffs' claims against the defendant are all dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiffs.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiffs completed each registration of transfer of ownership on one-half portion of each of the 1/2 shares of Ulsan-gu E land of 320 Ulsan-gu (hereinafter “instant land before the instant partition”) as the receipt of May 21, 1968 by the Ulsan District Court No. 5975, Sept. 14, 1950, respectively.

B. On October 22, 1970, the land before the instant subdivision was divided into three parcels of land in Ulsan-gu E (112 square meters), Ulsan-gu E (112 square meters), F 56 square meters, G (152 square meters), and the Plaintiffs, on October 23, 1970, completed the registration of transfer of ownership for E and G land among them on September 5, 1970.

C. Since then, the aforementioned two lands are currently located through the annexation and division with other lands, and the change of administrative districts, etc., the land E was the J-gu, Ulsan-gu (hereinafter “J land”) of J 472 square meters, and the land G was the land of Ulsan-gu, Ulsan-gu, and the land of Ulsan-gu 5617 square meters (hereinafter “K land”).

F Field 56 square meters, which was divided from the land before the division of this case, became the current area D 185 square meters (hereinafter “instant land”) after the division of this case, following the change of land category, the change of administrative district, etc.

On September 24, 1973, the defendant newly constructed and used the company house (hereinafter referred to as "the company house of this case") used by the defendant's officers and employees on the neighboring lands including J land and K land, and the land of this case is used as a garden within the above site constructed with fences from around that time.

【Ground of recognition】 The fact that there has been no dispute, Gap’s 1 through 6, 8, Eul’s 1 through 6 (including the branch numbers, respectively) and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. According to the above facts of determination as to the cause of the claim, since the defendant uses the land of this case owned by the plaintiffs as a fixed number in the company house site of this case, the defendant did not disclose the source of right.