1. All of the plaintiffs' claims are dismissed.

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

1. Basic facts

A. In the Land Survey Book drawn up in the Japanese Occupation Period, it is written that T, having the address column in 191, had the address column for the Gyeonggi-gun U. 3,638 (hereinafter “instant land”) and V,063 (hereinafter “instant land No. 2”) and V,063 (hereinafter “instant land”). The entire land Nos. 1 and 2 were assessed.

B. According to the Han River Register of the Han River Maintenance Basic Plan drawn up by the Ministry of Construction on December 12, 1978, each of the instant lands is excluded, and is included in the Han River basin which is a national river, and constitutes the desolate River site at present.

C. Since then, each of the instant lands was 12,027 square meters in Hanam-si, Hanam-si and 3,514 square meters in 12,027 square meters in X river, following the conversion of the area, land category, etc., and registration of preservation of ownership was completed in the future of Korea on June 14, 1984.

The succession relationship between the plaintiffs is as follows.

1) On May 19, 1941, T having the permanent domicile in the Gyeonggi-si Y succeeded to Australia. On November 19, 1967, the Z succeeded to Australia, AB, AC, AD, AE, and AF, each of their children, on the death of November 8, 1972, and the inheritance of AG, G, H, I, J, J, K, and L, each of whose children was AA’s children, was succeeded to, on the death of November 8, 1972. The AG died on January 31, 2004, and succeeded to the inheritance of the Plaintiff B, C, D, Plaintiff E, Plaintiff E, and F, each of whose children were their children.

3) AD’s death on September 23, 199 and succeeded to AH, PlaintiffO, and Plaintiff P. On June 9, 2004, AH died and succeeded to Plaintiff M, Plaintiff N, who was a child, due to the death of Plaintiff AF. 4) Plaintiff Q, Plaintiff R, and Plaintiff R, who was a child, due to the death of Plaintiff Q, Plaintiff R, and Plaintiff S.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 3, 6 through 10, and 13 through 17; each fact inquiry result to the head of the Seoul Regional Construction and Management Administration of this Court; the fact inquiry result of the fact inquiry conducted on December 7, 2015 to the subordinate market of this Court; and the purport of the whole pleadings.

2. The summary of the plaintiffs' causes of action is each of the lands of this case.