소유권이전등기
1. The Defendant marks 10, 17, and 10 of the attached drawings among the 166m2 in Mapo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government C, and 10m2.
1. Determination as to the cause of the Plaintiff’s claim (1) The Plaintiff is the owner of the Plaintiff’s neighborhood living facilities and housing buildings and housing buildings (hereinafter “Plaintiff’s land and building”) of the Mapo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government D 109 square meters, E large 13.9 square meters, and two above ground floors, and the Defendant is the owner of C large 166 square meters adjacent thereto (hereinafter “Defendant’s land”). ② The owner of the Plaintiff’s previous land is the owner of the Plaintiff’s land who constructed the Plaintiff’s new building around December 20, 1970, invaded the boundary between the Defendant’s land and the Defendant’s land, and occupied and used the Plaintiff’s land as the site for the Plaintiff’s building; ③ The F purchased the Plaintiff’s land and building on November 29, 198, and thereafter purchased the Plaintiff’s land and building on July 29, 195 from F.19 to the date of the Plaintiff’s occupancy or use of the instant land, and there was no special dispute between the Plaintiff’s landowner and the Plaintiff’s land owner’s ownership.
I would like to say.
2. Judgment on the defendant's assertion
A. While the Plaintiff owned the Plaintiff’s building, the Defendant occupied and used the instant real estate as the site for the said building by constructing a new building, and for which twenty years have not passed thereafter, the Defendant alleged that the prescriptive acquisition was not completed. However, in light of the fact that there is no special difference between the building area and the present area at the time of the construction of the Plaintiff’s building, it shall be deemed that the instant real estate was used as the site for the said building from the time of construction of the said building.