1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The land research division drawn up with respect to Suwon-gun D under the Japanese colonial rule is written as the owner of the Suwon-gun F&5 square meters G 480 square meters (hereinafter referred to as the “land before the instant partition”).

B. In around 1936, the land before the instant partition was divided into a section 289 square meters in the attached drawing among the part 905 square meters in Suwon-si B road as of Suwon-si, Suwon-si, and a section 234 square meters in the attached drawing (hereinafter referred to as “the land after the instant partition”), and the land category was simultaneously changed.

C. The cadastral records, etc. on the land after the instant partition were entirely destroyed due to the six thousand and twenty five incidents. According to the closed copy of the register, the Defendant completed the registration of ownership transfer on October 23, 1928 with respect to the land B in Suwon-gu, Suwon-gu, including the part of the unit of the drawings in the attached Form, due to the sale on September 18, 1928, and on February 6, 1987, the registration of ownership transfer was completed as to the same Gu C road 504 square meters, including the portion of the unit plan in the attached Form C.

E, upon the death without a child of the head of South-North H, I selected I as an ex post facto adopted child, and after the death of E, I succeeded to the property of E by himself at the same time as the head of Australia inherited the property of E. I died on January 27, 1965, and I jointly succeeded to the property of the Plaintiff’s mother, J and ASEAN, and on July 27, 1981, the J succeeded to the property of J.

[Ground of Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1-1, 2-2, Gap evidence 2-1, 2-3-1, 3-2, Gap evidence 5-1, 2, Gap evidence 5-2, Gap evidence 6-1, 2, Gap evidence 7-1, 7-2, Gap evidence 8-1, 2, 3, 4, Eul evidence 1-2, Eul evidence 1-2, Eul evidence and the purport of whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion that the land before the instant partition was owned by E, and the Plaintiff succeeded to the said land after the death of E.

Therefore, as to the land after the division of this case from each of the above lands, the defendant.