1. The Defendant: KRW 1,924,340, Plaintiff E, F, G, and I respectively to Plaintiff A 2,86,510, Plaintiff B, C, and D; and KRW 6,185,379, respectively.

1. Basic facts

A. In the Land Survey Division prepared during the Japanese Occupation Period, K’s address in J is indicated as being subject to the assessment of 489 square meters (hereinafter “instant assessment land”) prior to the Gyeonggi-gun L, Echeon-gun.

B. After the land category was changed to a river, registration of preservation of ownership was made in the name of the Republic of Korea on March 16, 1996. On December 28, 1996, M. M. 114,379 square meters was combined.

C. On May 16, 1939, K, the legal domicile of the plaintiffs in Dongcheon-gun N, died, and on the deceased on May 16, 1939, K, the deceased on the family and the inheritance of the property by the head of South-Nam-do O alone. On January 23, 1986, K, the deceased on January 23, 1986, P and children Qu (Inheritance), E, F, G, Plaintiff H, and the unmarried father-son at the time, who were married, succeeded to the property according to the legal share.

Q died on October 30, 2001, and the Plaintiff B, C, and D, the spouse of Q, jointly inherited the property of Q.

P died on October 14, 2007, the Plaintiff A, B, C, and D, who is the substitute heir of Plaintiff E, F, G, H, I, and Q, jointly inherited the property.

The specific inheritance shares of the plaintiffs are as shown in the annexed share calculation sheet.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 3, evidence Nos. 4-1 through 4, 5, evidence Nos. 6-1, 2, 9-1, 2, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The details of the relevant Acts and subordinate statutes are as shown in attached statutes;

3. Determination

A. In full view of the overall purport of the arguments in the evidence No. 5, K, the title of the situation of the claim for compensation of damages of this case, K and the plaintiffs, the title of the assessment of the land of this case, and the purport of the entire arguments in the evidence No. 5, K, the address of K, the title of the assessment of the land of this case, can be recognized as being incorporated into the Gyeonggi-gun R, the legal domicile of the plaintiffs, the domicile of the plaintiffs, and the names of both parties are the same as above, and there is no circumstance to suspect that K, the title of the plaintiffs, and Dongcheon-gun, the plaintiffs, had existed in the Leecheon-gun, the Dongcheon-gun, the Dongcheon-gun.