beta
Text
1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiffs.
Reasons
1. The Plaintiff’s assertion G completed the registration of ownership preservation on May 19, 193 upon the assessment of the instant land on January 15, 1912, and thereafter, through H and I, the deceased J, the father of the Plaintiffs purchased the instant land on or around February 1943. The deceased on October 19, 2006, and the Plaintiffs succeeded to one-six shares of each of the instant land.
Therefore, there is a benefit to seek confirmation of ownership against the defendant in order to complete registration of ownership preservation in the name of the plaintiffs with respect to the land of this case, and since the plaintiff F applied for registration of ownership preservation on the ground of the agreement on division of inherited property but rejected
2. In a case where there is a person who has been registered as an owner on the registry or the land cadastre or the forest land cadastre, and in a case where there is a person who has been registered as an owner on the registry or the forest land cadastre, an application for registration of preservation of ownership may be filed against the State when a final and conclusive judgment confirming that the relevant real estate is owned by the applicant for registration of preservation is filed. As such, a request for confirmation of ownership against the State is not unregistered, and the land is neither the registrant on the land cadastre or the forest land cadastre nor the identity of the registrant is unknown, and there is a benefit in confirmation
(See Supreme Court Decision 93Da58738 delivered on December 2, 1994). G does not have any dispute over the fact that it received the assessment of the instant land on January 15, 1912, and the Defendant did not assert that the instant land is its own ownership. Thus, the Plaintiffs cannot be deemed as the Defendant’s interest in seeking confirmation of ownership with the Republic of Korea as the Defendant.
3. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the ground that the instant lawsuit is unlawful and thus dismissed.