소유권이전등기
The part of the judgment of the first instance against the defendants shall be revoked.
The Plaintiff
A. Defendant B is not less than 3,114 square meters in Ansan-si.
1. The reasoning for this Court’s explanation concerning this part of the underlying facts is that the corresponding part of the judgment of the court of first instance is identical to that of the corresponding part of the judgment, except for the dismissal of some content as follows. Thus, it shall be cited in accordance with the main sentence of Article
The second place of the judgment of the court of first instance, the fourth place of the second place, and the second place of the second place of the judgment of the court of first instance, “M 879 square meters” shall be deemed as “R 879 square meters”.
The third written judgment of the court of first instance states "attached Form 31, 30, 55, 54, 53, 57-60, 31" in attached Form 20 as "attached Form 1, 12, 13, 13, 9, 10, 11, 7, 1."
The “M 3,054 square meters” in the fourth 6th son of the judgment of the first instance court shall be deemed as “R 3,054 square meters.”
2. Determination
A. 1) Even if the title holder on the register is changed before the expiration of the period of prescriptive acquisition, the reason alone cannot be deemed as the possessor’s continued destruction of the existing fact, and thus, it cannot be the reason for suspending the prescriptive acquisition (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 75Da2220, 2221, Mar. 9, 1976; Supreme Court Decision 97Da6186, Apr. 25, 197). As a new title holder, as a party to change the right and obligation at the time of the completion of prescriptive acquisition, would be at a disadvantage due to the completion of prescriptive acquisition, the new title holder may claim prescriptive acquisition against the title holder (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 73Da1093, 1094, Nov. 27, 1973). In addition, when calculating the period of prescriptive acquisition, if the title holder claims the period of prescriptive acquisition in question during the period, the new title holder shall not be determined by the court without his/her own assertion.