A. On May 27, 1983, Nonparty E owned the forest land of 35898 square meters (hereinafter “the forest of this case”) in Chungcheongnam-gun, Chungcheongnam-gun. However, on May 27, 1983, the registration of ownership transfer was completed with the Defendants and Nonparty F’s joint oil.

B. From March 30, 1982, the Plaintiff occupied the portion of 330 square meters in part of “1” (hereinafter “the land occupied in this case”) and installed and used graves in order to connect each point of the annexed table 1 to 8 and 1 among the forest land in this case.

C. As Nonparty F dies, the Defendants currently own the forest of this case.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1-1, 2-2, and Gap evidence 3, and the result of a request for surveying and appraisal to the branch offices assigned by the Korea Land Information Corporation, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. Upon completion of the statute of limitations for the acquisition of possession, Nonparty E and the Plaintiff prepared on March 30, 1982 a sale certificate with the purchase price of KRW 500,000 among the forest land of this case (hereinafter “the sale certificate of this case”) with the purchase price of KRW 100,000 among the forest land of this case. In addition to the facts that Defendant C, one of the joint owners, entered as a observer under the above sale certificate, and Defendant C did not dispute this case, and the possessor is presumed to have occupied the land in a peaceful and openly held possession with his intention from March 30, 1982, since the Plaintiff occupied the land of this case in a peaceful and openly held possession with the intention of possession from March 30, 1982, the statute of limitations for the acquisition of possession was completed on March 30, 202.

Therefore, barring any special circumstance, the Defendants are obligated to implement the registration procedure for ownership transfer on March 30, 2002 with respect to the land occupied by them to the Plaintiff.

B. Defendant B is doubtful as to whether the instant sale certificate was authenticly prepared, and the Plaintiff asserted that only the right to use the forest land for the installation and management of the grave is recognized.