중복등기말소
1. In accordance with the claims modified by this court, the Defendants are attached to the Plaintiff and the land indicated in the Schedule No. 1.
1. The following facts are recognized if the purport of the entire pleadings is added to each description of evidence Nos. 1 to 16 (including each number):
A. On May 17, 1948, the ownership transfer registration was completed in the name of the deceased X on the grounds of sale as of May 17, 1948, while the Defendants are the heirs of the deceased X.
(The status shall be as specified in attached Form 2, and the shares of inheritance shall be as specified in attached Form 6). (b)
The land before the division was divided into 11 square meters before V, Y, 77 square meters before Z, 225 square meters before AA, 11 square meters before AB, and 3 square meters before AB, and the registration of subdivision was cancelled on June 20, 2008.
C. The Plaintiff purchased, around May 30, 1971, the part in the attached Table 1 list among the land before the instant partition (hereinafter “the part in the possession of this case”). Before the cancellation, the Plaintiff purchased around May 30, 1971, and thereafter acquires a building on its ground after completing the registration of ownership transfer on November 30, 1972, and occupies it as its site and land attached thereto.
On the other hand, on May 27, 1911, the registration of ownership preservation was completed in the name of AD, and the registry (registration No. 5046, the former registration No. 105) was completed. As to the portion of possession of this case, the registration of ownership preservation was completed in the name of AE (AE) on June 15, 1959 with respect to the land whose size was 11 square meters in size as the same lot number as the land before the division of this case. The land category was changed to the site on November 30, 1972.
(2) According to the above facts of recognition on February, 200, it is reasonable to view that the registration of the site of this case was made after the registration of the land prior to the division of this case, and barring any special circumstances, it is null and void, barring any other special circumstance, and thus, the Plaintiff may claim possession as the basis for the acquisition by prescription with respect to the portion of possession of this case as follows.
Supreme Court Decision 200