Of the judgment of the court below, each part concerning registration of preservation of ownership in attached Tables 1 and 2 shall be reversed.

1. As to the grounds of appeal on each registration of preservation of ownership in attached Tables 1 and 2 of the judgment below

A. If the nature of the source of possessory right of real estate is not clear, the possessor shall be presumed to have occupied in good faith, peace, and public performance with his/her own intent pursuant to Article 197(1) of the Civil Act. Such presumption shall also apply likewise to cases where the possessor occupies the real estate by the State or a local government, which is the managing body of the cadastral record, etc. (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 2005Da36045, Jan. 26, 2006; 2006Da28065, Feb. 8, 2007). In addition, the presumption that the possessor acquired the possession on the basis of the source of title, which appears to have no intention to own by its nature, is broken up only when it is proved that the possessor had no intention to reject the ownership of another person, such as where the possessor did not act normally or would have taken place if the possessor had no intention to own it.

(1) The State or a local government is not obliged to submit documents regarding the procedure for acquiring land, the completion of the prescriptive acquisition of which is claimed by the State or a local government (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2005Da33541, Dec. 9, 2005). Meanwhile, even if the State or a local government is unable to submit documents regarding the procedure for acquiring land, it cannot be readily concluded that the State or a local government occupied the land with the knowledge that there is a separate person registered as the owner

Rather, considering the situation and purpose of the possession, it can be ruled out that the state or local government has lawfully acquired the ownership through the acquisition procedure of public property at the time of the commencement of possession.