The costs of appeal are assessed against the Plaintiff.

For reasons indicated in its holding, the lower court determined that the Plaintiff could not exercise exclusive and exclusive rights to use the instant land, on the grounds that it is reasonable to deem that the previous owner renounced his exclusive and exclusive rights to use the instant land by providing the instant land without compensation, and that the Plaintiff also acquired the ownership of the instant land by allowing such circumstances or at least knowing such circumstances.

In light of the relevant legal principles and records, the above determination by the court below is just and acceptable. Contrary to the allegations in the grounds of appeal, the court below did not err by misapprehending the legal principles on the waiver of the right to use and benefit and the effect of the succession thereof

The Supreme Court precedents cited in the grounds of appeal are inappropriate to be invoked in the instant case, since they differ from the instant case.

Therefore, the appeal is 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.