The costs of appeal are assessed against the Plaintiff.

1. According to the reasoning of the lower judgment as to the ground of appeal on the instant real estate No. 1, the lower court acknowledged the facts as indicated in its reasoning based on its adopted evidence, and determined that it is reasonable to deem the Plaintiff to waive the benefit of the completion of prescriptive acquisition on the instant

In light of the relevant legal principles and records, the above determination by the court below is acceptable. In so doing, it did not err by misapprehending the rules of logic and experience or by misapprehending the legal principles on waiver of prescription benefit.

2. According to the reasoning of the lower judgment as to the grounds of appeal on the 2 and 3 real estate of this case, the lower court acknowledged the facts as indicated in its reasoning based on the adopted evidence, and determined that the presumption that the Plaintiff occupied the 2 and 3 real estate of this case, including the possession of C, for twenty years was broken.

In light of the relevant legal principles and records, the above determination by the court below is just and acceptable, and there is no error in the misapprehension of the rules of logic and experience or the legal principles on the presumption of possession independently.

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.