소유권이전등기
All appeals are dismissed.
The costs of appeal are assessed against the Defendants.
1. As to the appeal by Defendant B, D, E, F, and G, the above Defendants did not submit the appellate brief within the statutory period, and did not state the grounds of appeal in the petition of appeal.
2. On the grounds of appeal by the remaining Defendants, the lower court, on the grounds as indicated in its reasoning, held that the deceased W continued to possess the real estate from February 15, 1961 to June 15, 201, which was received from the deceased V, and the possession of the deceased W is presumed to have been possessed in a peaceful manner by its owner. The deceased W acquired each of the of the of the of the instant real estate by prescription on February 15, 1961 after the lapse of 20 years from February 15, 1961, when the possession of each of the instant real estate was commenced, and the Plaintiff succeeded to the status of a prescriptive acquisitor on each of the instant real estate as the deceased’s heir upon the division of inherited property. Accordingly, the Defendants were liable to the Plaintiff to perform each of the following procedures on each inheritance share due to the completion of the acquisition by prescription on February 15, 1981.
In light of the relevant legal principles and records, the above determination by the court below is justifiable.
In so doing, contrary to what is alleged in the grounds of appeal, the lower court did not exhaust all necessary deliberations as to who is true owner.
or misunderstanding the legal principles on the prescription of possession of real property.
No error is beyond the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence against logical and empirical rules.
3. Therefore, all appeals are dismissed, and the costs of appeal are assessed against the losing party. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.