A. Of the land size of 566 square meters in the annexed sheet No. 1,2, 3, 39, 38, 37, 36, 35, 34, 5.

A. The Plaintiff owned D and one other as divided on February 2, 1979 on the 5, 1979, the 566m2 in Geumsan-gun, Geumsan-gun (hereinafter “instant land”). Furthermore, the Plaintiff completed the registration of ownership transfer on October 5, 1984 on May 11, 1995.

B. Of the instant land, there is a waterway (hereinafter “instant waterway”) on the surface of a part of 116 square meters (hereinafter “the instant waterway”) among the instant land, and the Defendant occupied and managed the instant waterway.

[Reasons for Recognition] The entry of Gap evidence No. 1, the result of the survey appraisal, the fact inquiry results in the Geumsan-gun, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion and judgment

A. 1) The Plaintiff, the title holder of the instant land, seeking the removal of the instant waterway and the transfer of the instant waterway land to the Defendant. Accordingly, the Defendant asserted that, around 1979, the Defendant acquired the instant waterway from the Geumsan-gun, which implemented the land rearrangement project for the instant zone, and managed the instant waterway from that time, and thereafter, acquired the instant waterway by prescription. 2) According to Article 197(1) of the Civil Act of the relevant legal doctrine, the occupant of the instant waterway is presumed to have occupied the instant waterway as his/her own intent.

If the possessor asserts the acquisition by prescription, he/she does not bear the burden of proving his/her own intention, and has the burden of proof for the person who denies the establishment of the acquisition by prescription by asserting that the possessor has no intention to own it.

Whether or not the possessor's possession is the possession with the intention of possession or with the intention of possession without the intention of possession should not be determined by the internal deliberation of the possessor, but by the nature of the title that caused the acquisition of possession or by all circumstances related to the possession, it should be determined externally and objectively.

Therefore, the possessor has no intention to own by nature.