소유권이전등기
The plaintiff's lawsuit against the defendant is dismissed.
The remaining Defendants except the Defendant Republic of Korea are the Defendants.
The summary of the cause of the claim is that AE received the assessment of around February 1913, the land of 115 square meters and 106 square meters before AD in Seopo-si, Seopo-si (hereinafter “each of the instant lands”) prior to AC, Seopo-si, Seopo-si, Seopo-si, and is subject to management by being incorporated into 902 square meters before AF in Seopo-si, Seopo-si.
On September 8, 1971, the mother of the Plaintiff purchased and cultivated each of the above lands on September 8, 1971, and increased the Plaintiff on January 1, 1981.
AG and the Plaintiff succeeding to possession from the Plaintiff: (a) possession of each of the instant land in a peaceful manner with the intent to own it for at least twenty (20) years; and (b) possession acquired prescription was completed on September 8, 1991.
Therefore, the Defendants (excluding Defendant Republic of Korea) who are inheritance of AE are obligated to implement the registration procedure for ownership transfer on the ground of the completion of the prescription period for possession of each of the pertinent shares of inheritance among each of the instant lands to the Plaintiff.
However, since the address of AE is not registered in the land ledger of each of the instant lands, it cannot be proved by the land ledger as the owner is, thus, the defendant's heir is seeking confirmation of ownership in subrogation of the heir of AE.
It is clear that AE acquired each of the lands of this case at the discretion of AE in the main defense of Defendant Republic of Korea before the main defense, and if the Plaintiff acquired each of the lands at the discretion of AE, it is possible to register the preservation of ownership.
Therefore, there is no benefit to seek confirmation of ownership against the state.
Judgment
If a claim for confirmation of land ownership against the State is unregistered and the land is not registered in the land ledger or in the forest ledger or in the absence of the registered title holder, or in the absence of identity of the registered title holder, the benefits of confirmation shall be limited to cases where the State continues to assert ownership while denying ownership by a third party registered.