1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. Basic facts

A. The copy of the old register of the Dong-gu Daejeon Special Metropolitan City B road B(hereinafter “instant real estate”) shall be registered on February 16, 1963 by the “E” having the address in Daejeon Special Metropolitan City D with respect to the said real estate, and on November 4, 1975, the said E’s domicile is changed to Daejeon Special Metropolitan City F.

B. The instant real estate is registered as the owner of the “E” with the domicile in the Daejeon F, and the “E” with the domicile in the “F” is also indicated as the owner in the land cadastre of the instant real estate.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 and 9 (including additional number), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination as to the benefit of confirmation

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion that the instant real estate was owned by C (the Plaintiff’s father of August 19, 2002), and the instant real estate was incorporated into the land of “G Road Expansion Corporation,” but the Plaintiff was unable to receive compensation on the grounds that the said C’s real estate registration injury domicile and resident registration domicile differ from that of the said C, thus seeking confirmation against the Defendant that the instant real estate was owned by the said network C.

B. The defendant's defense prior to the merits and the judgment of this case are the defense prior to the merits that the lawsuit of this case does not have a benefit in confirmation. Thus, the defendant's claim for confirmation of land ownership against the State is unregistered and the land is not registered and the registrant is unknown on the land cadastre or the forest land cadastre, and there is a benefit in confirmation only in special circumstances, such as the State's refusal of ownership by a third party who is the titleholder of registration or enrollment, and the State's continued to assert state ownership

(See Supreme Court Decision 2009Da48633 Decided October 15, 2009, etc.). However, according to the above facts of recognition, the real estate of this case is not in the state of non-registration, and the owner of the real estate register and land cadastre is indicated as E, and the defendant is the real estate of this case.