소유권이전등기
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
1. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion was as follows: (a) the Plaintiff occupied each of the instant land in a peaceful and public manner with the intent to own it for at least twenty (20) years;
2. Determination
A. According to the relevant laws and regulations at the time of the land survey project during the Japanese colonial era, the land category was examined as a road but the lot number was not set at the time of the land survey project, and the land registered in the Land Survey Book or not registered in the Land Survey Book was a state-owned property which was used as a road according to the current status at the time of the survey. The state-owned property under the jurisdiction of the Korean Government before August 9, 1945 is naturally owned by the state-owned property with its own authority at the time of the establishment of the Korean Government and the establishment of the Korean Government
Furthermore, Article 7(2) of the State Property Act provides, “Administrative property shall not be subject to the acquisition by prescription, notwithstanding Article 245 of the Civil Act,” and thus, in order to complete the acquisition by prescription of State property, such property shall continue to be general property, not administrative property, for the period of acquisition by prescription.
(Supreme Court Decision 2010Da58957 Decided November 25, 2010, etc.). According to the overall purport of the statements and arguments in the evidence Nos. 2 and 3 (including each number), Nos. 1, 1, 4, and 5, each of the instant lands was indicated as a road on the cadastral source map prepared at the time of the Land Survey Project, which was set up in the Japanese colonial Rule, but the lot number was not separately set. The fact that each of the instant lands was registered in the Land Survey Book or has not been registered on the land cadastre, that the registration of preservation of ownership was completed as owned by Defendant on August 28, 1976, each of the instant lands was registered as an administrative property in the State-owned property register, and that each of the instant lands was thereafter managed as administrative property thereafter.
In light of the above legal principles, each land of this case was owned by the state from the time of the land survey project under the Japanese colonial Rule to the present day.