소유권이전등기
1. The Defendant is on the ground of the completion of the statute of limitations for acquisition by possession on January 1, 2014 with respect to the land size of 1468 square meters in the Plaintiff’s permanent residence.
1. Comprehensively taking account of the overall purport of the arguments written in Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 5 as to the cause of the claim, ① permanent residence C is 1468 square meters, D 1398 square meters, neighboring land (hereinafter “C land and D land”) in permanent residence, from March 28, 1979 to the defendant future, and from D, the ownership transfer registration has been completed in the plaintiff future. ② The defendant purchased C land on December 30, 1968, and began to occupy D land from around that time by misunderstanding the location of D land, ③ the plaintiff’s father E (hereinafter “the deceased”) purchased D land on March 9, 1982, and completed the registration of ownership transfer by misunderstanding the location of D, C, and occupation of C from around that time, ④ the plaintiff’s obligation to occupy C land on the date of completion of public performance by 10 years to the date of completion of argument. Thus, the defendant can be found to have occupied C14 years to the plaintiff’s acquisition by succession.
2. Judgment on the defendant's defense
A. The Defendant’s assertion that the ownership of D land was transferred to F, the deceased’s wife to F, and to F, the deceased’s wife to G, and to G, the Plaintiff and the deceased’s mother to the Plaintiff. As such, the Plaintiff or the deceased could have known that the land occupied in the process of transferring the ownership or receiving agricultural subsidies was C, not land D, and thus, the possession of the Plaintiff or the deceased constitutes the possession of the owner in bad faith.
B. As to the prescriptive acquisition by prescription 1, the intention of ownership, which is the requirement for independent possession, is objectively determined by the nature of the source of possessory right, but the nature of the source of possessory right is unclear.