1. The plaintiff (appointed)'s claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the plaintiff (appointed party).

1. Basic facts

A. On May 10, 1962 with respect to the previous real estate of H 3,392 square meters (hereinafter “the previous real estate of this case”) prior to H in Kuju-si, the registration of the owner’s restoration was made in the name of H, and I was registered as the owner on the land cadastre.

B. On December 28, 1994, the previous real estate of this case was divided into 1,739 square meters before B on December 28, 1994, and the previous real estate of this case was divided into 1,653 square meters before H in Won-si. The previous real estate of this case was divided into 1,653 square meters from 1,739 square meters before B in Jeonju-si on March 17, 200, and the land of this case was divided into 734 square meters before J in Jeonju-si on March 17, 200, as stated in the purport of the claim in B

C. The I died on February 23, 1967, and the I’s heir is the Plaintiff (Appointed Party) and the Selection C, D, E, F, and G.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap 1 to 4, Eul 1 to 3, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. Since I, the decedent of the Plaintiff (Appointed Party) was registered as the owner on the land cadastre of the instant real estate unregistered by the Plaintiff (Appointed Party), the instant real estate is owned by the heir of the said I.

Therefore, the Plaintiff (Appointed Party) seeks confirmation of ownership against the Defendant in order to complete the registration of ownership preservation on the instant real estate.

B. Determination 1) Even if the name was written in the previous land cadastre column restored before the amendment of the Cadastral Act on December 31, 1975, the presumption of right cannot be recognized (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 98Da34485, Sept. 3, 199; 98Da5708, 5715, Jul. 10, 1998; 95Da16493, Aug. 22, 1995). In light of the above legal principles, even if the above facts were recorded in the previous land cadastre column restored before the amendment of the Cadastral Act on December 31, 1975, it is insufficient to recognize that the above I acquired the ownership of the real estate in this case, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge otherwise.

Based on this premise.