1. The defendant received on February 4, 2005 from the plaintiff as to each land listed in the separate sheet from Suwon District Court.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. Land assessment and division 1) In the land survey division of E-Sa-gun B, D with the address in E-Sa-gun C on February 8, 1912 (Sa-Sa-Sa-Sa-Sa-Sa-Sa-Sa-Sa-Sa-Sa-Sa-Sa-Sa-Sa-Sa-Sa-Y

ii) E was divided into F, G, and subsequent G was subdivided into G, H, and I, and H was further subdivided into H and J.

(Finally divided H and J are land listed in the separate sheet; hereinafter referred to as “instant land”). (b)

1) On April 17, 1926, D, the permanent domicile of which was established in Jongno-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government K, died on April 17, 1926, and M, which was adopted on March 10, 1924, succeeded to D alone as the ex post facto adoption of D, and on March 11, 1924, M died on March 11, 1966, and N and his wife jointly succeeded to M’s property. The Plaintiff succeeded to M’s O as the children of GO, the son of M.

3) On November 15, 1915, the Plaintiff’s multiple copies of the Plaintiff’s line D, indicated that D moved from P to G to G to G to G to Jungsung. P is currently the name of Jung-gu, Seoul, and R as of Apr. 1, 1911, as the name of Jung-gu, Kim Sung-sung, as of Mar. 1, 1914, as Sung-sung, as of Mar. 1, 1914, and as of Apr. 1, 1914, the name of the administrative district was changed to P to P as of Apr. 1, 1914. The Defendant completed the registration of preservation of ownership on the instant land on Feb. 4, 2005 (hereinafter “instant ownership preservation registration”).

(i) [In the absence of dispute over the basis of recognition, entry of Gap-1 to 17 evidence, the purport of the whole pleadings.]

2. Determination as to the cause of action

A. As shown in the above facts of recognition, it is reasonable to see D and Plaintiff’s fleet D as the same person in full view of the following: (a) the name of the circumstance titleholder D and Plaintiff’s Chinese name is identical; and (b) the Plaintiff’s fleet D were residing in G, the address of the situation titleholder at the time of the land situation prior to the division; and (c) there is no evidence to deem that there was a Dong name in the above region.

Therefore, the plaintiff.