1. Revocation of a judgment of the first instance;

2. The defendant is among the Dongdaemun-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government C mass 103.5 square meters

A. The plaintiff AF, AG, and AH respectively 3.

1. Basic facts

A. On August 8, 1963, the Seoul Dongdaemun-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government incorporated the 6th group of the 4th group of the D Forest (1,380 square meters, hereinafter “the instant forest”) owned by the Defendant into the E Land Readjustment Project, and divided it into the 6th group of the Dongdaemun-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government F or G 36 lots (hereinafter “each land after division”).

B. The Defendant, from around 1964 to 1966, possessed a house on each land after dividing the forest of this case from the point where the forest of this case was divided, and sold each land to the occupant of the pertinent land after receiving an application for purchase of state property from the occupant who resided in the relevant land.

C. Upon the completion of the said land readjustment project on October 5, 1967, the Seoul Metropolitan Government issued a land substitution disposition with regard to the aggregate of 1,380 square meters of the size of each 36 parcels of land and the five parcels of land adjacent thereto (H site 42 square meters, 44 square meters, J forest 37, 8 square meters, 11 square meters, and L forest 12 square meters in total (hereinafter “instant co-owned land”) of the aggregate of 1,522 square meters of the five parcels of land adjacent thereto, including the instant forest and the five parcels of land adjacent thereto (hereinafter “instant co-owned land”).

At this time, Dongdaemun-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government X Forest land 57 square meters (hereinafter “Before land substitution”) was replaced with the land of 103.5 square meters (the same location as the land before land substitution; hereinafter “instant land”).

The name-free person, who owned and resided on the land before replotting, entered into a sales contract for state property to purchase the land before replotting with the defendant, and paid the price in full to the defendant.

However, since the subdivision registration on the forest of this case has not yet been completed, the defendant completed the registration of transfer of ownership with respect to shares of 57/1380 of the forest of this case to the purchaser of the land before replotting.

After that, among the forest land in this case.