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

A. The Plaintiff’s father, the father, owned the land E (hereinafter “E land”).

On January 27, 1992, the Plaintiff completed the registration of ownership transfer for E land donation.

B. The Defendant’s father, F, the father of the Defendant, owned the land C (hereinafter “C land”).

On October 13, 1999, the defendant completed the registration of ownership transfer on land C due to donation.

C. According to the boundary restoration surveying conducted by the Director of the Korea Land Information Corporation around 2017, the boundary between E-land and C land is a line that connects each point of Attached Form 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, and 12.

(A) This is the same as the line connecting each point in order of 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, and 17 of the Appendix 1.

The plaintiff occupies the land of this case as of the closing date of the pleading of this case.

The land in this case contains landscape trees, such as pine trees.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 4, 8, Eul evidence Nos. 1 and 5 (including each number number), G witness G testimony, result of on-site inspection on December 8, 2017, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. Since January 27, 1992, the Plaintiff asserted that the land of this case was occupied in peace and openly as the intention to own the land of this case among the land C from January 27, 1992 to the present date, the Plaintiff acquired by prescription the land of this case on January 27, 201

Therefore, the Defendant is obligated to implement the registration procedure for transfer of ownership on January 27, 2012 with respect to the instant land to the Plaintiff.

B. The Defendant’s assertion that the Plaintiff occupied the instant land for twenty (20) years, and that the Plaintiff’s possession is independent possession.

3. Determination 1: The limitation period system of possession acquisition is a system that excludes potential persons on the right and respects the real situation of occupancy use. However, it should be recognized only under extremely exceptional circumstances.

This is excessively broad.