1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

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

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On June 26, 2009, the Defendant notified the Plaintiff on June 26, 2009, that the Plaintiff, the heir, shall file an application for the correction of the registered matters of the instant land (cancellation) by July 31, 2009, because the land cadastre and the register exists, but there is no entity that has already been pointed out and its location is unknown, and the land constitutes the land subject to the correction of registered matters.

B. On August 3, 2009, the Defendant did not apply for correction of the Plaintiff’s registered matters within the time limit set in the above notice, and ex officio cancelled the instant disposition ex officio pursuant to Article 24(2) of the Cadastral Act and Article 31(1)4 of the Enforcement Decree of the above Act.

[Grounds for recognition] Gap 1, 2, Eul 1 to 5, 7, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Although the Plaintiff’s judgment as to this safety defense actually existed, the Defendant alleged that the disposition of this case by which the registry of this case was cancelled is unlawful, the Defendant’s land cadastre cancellation was not an administrative disposition, and thus, the Defendant’s claim of this case seeking its cancellation is unlawful. Thus, the Defendant’s act of registering a certain matter in the cadastral record, such as the building site and the cadastral map, or changing a registered matter in the cadastral record is intended to take advantage of the convenience of the execution of administrative affairs and as a material of a certificate of fact, and does not cause a change in the substantive legal relationship to the pertinent land due to the registration or change, and the competent authority ex officio corrected the registered matter. The location, lot number, land category, and boundary of the pertinent land are determined

Even if the subject of an appeal is not an administrative disposition, it can not be said to be an administrative disposition.

As such, the Plaintiff’s lawsuit in this case is unlawful (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 95Nu9747, Dec. 12, 1995).

3...