2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

A. On December 18, 1918, the Plaintiff’s Choun-gun, Seoul-gun, the neighboring land of this case, was assessed against 1 to 5 f forest land in 1 to 5 f forest land in Yan-gun, Seoul-gun, and was engaged in cultivating the instant land and the instant F land from around that time, and as E died on March 4, 1943, D, the father of the Plaintiff, continued to grow in the instant land, etc.

B. D died on November 28, 1983. Since that time, the Plaintiff directly cultivated the instant land, which was specified as inherited property, and thereafter, was appointed to G, her mother, as her mother, as her mother, to grow the instant land around 1986. Since 2008, D had been in charge of cultivating the instant land. Since 2008, she had been in charge of growing the instant land to H, her mother, and she had cultivated the instant land.

C. The Defendant registered the instant land as the owner on June 21, 1993 in the forest land register, and completed the registration of ownership preservation on April 28, 1998.

[Ground of recognition] A without dispute, Gap evidence 1 through 5 (including each number), Eul evidence 3, Eul's testimony by the witness of the first instance court, the result of the fact-finding verification by the court of the first instance, the purport of whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. According to the above facts of recognition as the cause of the claim, it is reasonable to view that the Plaintiff acquired possession of the instant land from 1983 to the date of its father and possessed it in peace and openly as owned by the intention of possession until now. In the event that the real estate owner is the same during the possession period and there is no change therein, the Plaintiff may choose the starting point of prescriptive acquisition at will (see Supreme Court Decision 97Da8496, 8502, May 12, 1998). Barring special circumstances, the Defendant is obligated to implement the registration procedure for ownership transfer on the instant land as sought by the Plaintiff, as requested by the Plaintiff, for the acquisition by prescription on February 22, 2013.

B. Although the Defendant’s assertion 1 E was found to have received an assessment of the above F Forest, in light of the circumstances where there was no right to commence possession of the instant land, E is a malicious occupant of the instant land without permission.