소유권이전등기절차이행
The appeal is dismissed.
The costs of appeal are assessed against the Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff).
The grounds of appeal are examined (to the extent of supplement in case of supplemental appellate briefs not timely filed).
1. The lower court, based on its stated reasoning, rejected all of the counterclaim claims filed by the Defendant and the Defendant’s successor, who claimed against the Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff; hereinafter “Defendant”) for the performance of the procedure for ownership transfer registration based on the completion of the prescriptive acquisition on August 29, 2016, on the part of the instant dispute. Meanwhile, the lower court rejected all of the counterclaim claims by the Defendant and the Defendant’s successor, who asserted that the Plaintiff occupied and used the instant dispute without permission, and claimed that the part of the instant dispute is occupied and used without permission.
The judgment below
Examining the reasoning in light of the record, the lower court did not err in its judgment by misapprehending the legal doctrine regarding the nature of possessory right, the presumption of possession with intention to own, the destruction thereof, and the voluntary selection of the starting point of the prescription period for acquisition of possession, or by exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence against logical and empirical rules
2. The lower court determined as to the grounds of appeal Nos. 4 and 5, on the grounds as indicated in its reasoning, that the Defendant is liable to pay the Plaintiff KRW 535,902,00 at the market price of the part in the dispute of this case and delay damages as indicated in its reasoning when the execution of the procedure for the registration of ownership transfer is impossible.
The judgment below
Examining the reasoning in light of the record, the lower court did not err in its judgment by misapprehending the legal doctrine on the computation of damages due to nonperformance of the duty of ownership transfer registration, and legal relations in the status of nonperformance, etc.
3. 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.