소유권이전등기
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
1. In the Plaintiff’s assertion, B forest Nos. 1,468 square meters was owned by Japan, which was a Japanese occupation-based Japanese occupation-based Japanese occupation-based Japanese occupation-based occupation-based occupation-based occupation-based occupation-based occupation-based occupation-based occupation-based occupation-based occupation-based occupation-based occupation-based occupation-based occupation-based occupation-based occupation
On the other hand, the plaintiff's children E, E, F, and F's children through inheritance continued to use the above land as dry field or create family burials through inheritance, etc. for about 7 years.
Ultimately, since D, around 1940, purchased the above land from C in 1940, possession was commenced with its intention to own it, and the prescription period for possession was completed on December 31, 1960 after 20 years passed thereafter, the Defendant, the owner of the above land, is liable to implement the procedure for ownership transfer registration on the ground of the completion of the prescription period for possession acquisition on the above land.
2. As of August 9, 1945, the property in the name of Japanese owner shall be reverted to the government on September 25, 1945 under subparagraph 33 of the military law. However, a person who asserts that he purchased the ownership from Japanese owner on the property before that date may assert the ownership by either obtaining a ruling on the cancellation of reversion or a ruling on the cancellation of reversion by a simple petition, or obtaining a confirmation from the court under subparagraph 103 of the military law, or by obtaining a confirmation from the court under subparagraph 120 of the military law, or by obtaining a cancellation of reversion by a final and conclusive judgment. Accordingly, a person who did not receive the above cancellation of reversion can not claim the ownership on the ground of such purchase. According to subparagraph 33 of the military law, according to the above subparagraph 33 of the military law, he shall not claim the ownership. Since he issued an objection to the possessor of the property in the name of Japanese owner on August 9, 194, and ordered the disposition or possession without permission from the authorities, the possessor shall bear the previous obligation to keep it.