1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Basic facts

A. On August 19, 1939, the Plaintiff’s fleet C established a permanent domicile in the Gyeonggi-gun D, E, a family heir, solely inherited C’s property as the deceased on August 19, 1939.

B. On December 1, 1976, E died and jointly succeeded to the property of F, G, H, Plaintiff, and I, their children. On December 1, 1978, the co-inheritors held an agreement on the division of inherited property with the content that the right to the instant real estate belongs to the Plaintiff on December 2, 2018.

C. Meanwhile, on May 8, 1960, the Defendant completed the registration of initial ownership on the instant real estate as the receipt No. 898 of May 8, 1960.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 2 and 6 (if there are virtual numbers, including each number; hereinafter the same shall apply), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion and judgment

A. According to the Plaintiff’s assertion on July 9, 1929, the Plaintiff stated that the 3,200 square meters of the Kacheon-gun K forest owned C was incorporated into a reserved forest pursuant to Article 1 of the Decree on the Public Notice of the Dogman-gun’s Do governor as the J. The said land became the 1,394 square meters of Lancheon-si, the 83 square meters of forest land, the 83 square meters of forest land, and the instant real estate after division and change of administrative district name.

Therefore, it is reasonable to deem that C received the said forest land as a relative from the State when the forest under the name of the State was incorporated into the reserved forest as above at the time of the implementation of the Japanese-gun Forest Survey Project. Therefore, it is reasonable to deem that C received the said forest land as a relative from the State, and the owner of the instant real estate divided from 3,200 square meters, is also C, the plaintiff.

However, the defendant completed the registration of ownership preservation on the premise that the real estate in this case is a non-real estate, and this is an infringement on the ownership of the owner of a reserved forest, and thus the registration of invalidity of the cause is the registration. Therefore, the plaintiff seeks against the defendant for the execution of the registration procedure of ownership transfer based on the restoration

B. Determination 1 Facts A, No. 3.