A. On November 15, 1978, C purchased a 221 square meter (hereinafter “instant site”) and a single-story house (hereinafter “instant building”) on the same day from the Gosi-gun, Gosi-gun, Gosi-gun, and the same day, and completed the registration of ownership transfer thereof on December 21, 1978. At the time, C included 49 square meters (hereinafter “instant land”) on the wall of the instant building in the wall.

B. E received the instant site and building from C on August 16, 2004, and completed the registration of ownership transfer thereof on the 20th of the same month, and the Plaintiff purchased the instant site and building from E on April 11, 2006 and completed the registration of ownership transfer on May 17, 2006.

C. Meanwhile, the Defendant completed the registration of initial ownership on May 19, 1986 on the instant land, and the Korea Asset Management Corporation sent advance notice of indemnities and guidance to conclude loan contracts on the ground that the instant building was constructed on the instant land on October 2012 to the Plaintiff.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 through 8 (including each branch number), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. As seen earlier, it is presumed that C/E’s determination on the cause of the claim had been based on the Plaintiff’s possession of the instant land from the time it was purchased and donated to the Plaintiff until the time it was purchased and sold by the Plaintiff, and that the possession was carried out in a peaceful manner with the intention of ownership (Article 197(1) of the Civil Act). In addition, if the registrant continues to be the same during the period of prescriptive acquisition, it is sufficient to confirm the lapse of the said period by deeming the starting point to be where the starting point can be claimed for the completion of the prescriptive acquisition between the time and the point at which the registrant can claim the completion of the prescriptive acquisition. As such, even in cases where the total period of one’s possession has elapsed by succession to the possession of the former possessor, the starting

Supreme Court Decision 199Na1488 delivered on May 12, 1998