소유권이전등기
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. Of the costs of lawsuit, the costs of surveying and appraisal shall be borne by the Plaintiff and the Defendant, respectively.
1. Facts of recognition;
A. On April 9, 1965, the registration of ownership transfer was completed on April 9, 1965 with respect to the land of 191 square meters (hereinafter “Defendant land in this case”) in Seocho-gu, Changwon-si, Changwon-si, the registration of ownership transfer was completed on November 28, 200.
B. The registration of ownership transfer was completed on August 20, 1982 with respect to the land of this case, which is the land adjacent to the west-gu, Changwon-gu, Seoul Special Metropolitan City (hereinafter “the Plaintiff’s land”) with respect to the land of this case, for which the registration of ownership transfer was completed on the ground of the donation made on August 20, 1981 in the F. The registration of ownership transfer was completed on March 12, 2004 in the Plaintiff’s future on March 2, 2004.
C. On the Plaintiff’s land, G was an unauthorized house owned by G at 24.38 square meters, but G donated the Plaintiff’s land to F, his spouse on August 20, 1981, and donated the Plaintiff’s land to F, who was also an unauthorized house on the ground.
On March 2, 2004, the Plaintiff purchased the Plaintiff’s land and its ground without permission. D.
Meanwhile, on October 26, 1983, the Defendant completed the registration of preservation of ownership on the Defendant’s land and its adjacent land, as to the saves colon house (hereinafter “the Defendant’s house”) constructed on the H land of the Jingu, Changwon-si, Changwon-si.
E. At present, there are (c) parts on the ground of the Plaintiff’s land that are used for upper bond and (d) parts that are used for (c) and below bonding (hereinafter the above (c) and (d) parts on the ground of the Plaintiff’s land.
F. Between the Plaintiff’s land and the Defendant’s land, and the Plaintiff’s land and the Defendant’s housing were installed, and the fence was located at the boundary of the said land.
However, the fence line does not coincide with the boundary in the cadastral map, and as indicated in the Appendix No. 2. Map, the fence line of the Plaintiff’s housing was invaded by the Defendant’s land, and it was the Defendant’s housing.