1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

1. In full view of the purport of the entire pleadings, the following facts can be acknowledged in each entry of evidence Nos. 17-1, 2, A26, A27-1, A65-3.

The Plaintiff owned the land of 1,062 square meters in the Gu-U.S. C, and D owned the land of 625 square meters in the Gu-U.S., the adjacent thereto. However, on April 24, 1998, the Plaintiff requested the Korea Cadastral Corporation to conduct a boundary restoration survey, and the F of the Korea Cadastral Corporation conducted a boundary restoration survey on the land of Da on the said land.

B. On April 27, 2001, the G of the Korea Cadastral Corporation entrusted a surveying to the Korea Cadastral Corporation, and conducted a boundary restoration surveying of the above land E on April 27, 2001. Unlike F’s measurement result, G’s measurement result raised an objection to the difference between F’s measurement result and F, but not accepted, G’s confirmation was sought against D on October 18, 2001, and filed a lawsuit to seek compensation for damages against the Republic of Korea and the Korea Cadastral Corporation (Seoul District Court Kimcheon-do 2001Kadan888).

C. Of the above litigation, H was selected as a survey appraiser and submitted the survey result map on February 7, 2002 to the court. However, on December 14, 2002, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit seeking damages equivalent to the survey appraisal cost (Seoul Southern District Court 2002Gaso256952) on the ground that the survey result was conducted with H on the same ground as G’s survey result, and the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against H on December 14, 2002, but was sentenced to a judgment against September 2, 2003.

In the appellate court in accordance with the plaintiff's appeal (Seoul District Court 2003Na48159), the defendant B was selected as a survey appraiser, according to the plaintiff's prepayment of survey expenses, the defendant was conducting a survey, and submitted a survey appraisal report to the court on October 27, 2004.

E. The plaintiff alleged in the above appellate court that he conspireds with G, H and Defendant B to manipulate, alter, and conceal data in order to conceal that the result of his survey appraisal was false, but without admitting the result of the survey appraisal conducted by Defendant B on July 13, 2006 as evidence, the plaintiff's above assertion is without merit.