소유권이전등기
The defendants' appeal is dismissed.
The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendants.
The judgment of the court of first instance No. 1 is ordered.
1. The following facts of recognition are not disputed between the parties, or may be recognized by the evidence Nos. 1 and 3 (including the number of branches; hereinafter the same shall apply), the evidence Nos. 1 and 3, the result of the appraisal by the trial appraiser K, and the purport of the whole theory of changes.
A. On December 18, 1987, the Plaintiff purchased cement 115 square meters and ground bricks and cement 115 square meters, roof single-storys, and neighboring living facilities (hereinafter “instant building”) from H around December 18, 1987, and registered the transfer of ownership as the Seoul Northern District Court’s Dobong registry office on December 21, 1987, and registered the transfer of ownership as 104705 square meters from that time.
B. From July 12, 1966, the deceased on March 6, 1994, the deceased on the part of the Plaintiff and the deceased on March 6, 1994, and the Defendants, who are the deceased B and their children, inherited their property at the statutory share of inheritance. The deceased on September 18, 2019, after the first judgment, the deceased on September 18, 2019, and the Defendants inherited the deceased’s property at the statutory share of inheritance.
(c)
On the other hand, part of the instant building was built in sequence 2, 3, 6, 5, and 2, which connected each point of the annexed drawing Nos. 2, 3, 6, 5, and 2 to each point of the instant land (hereinafter “the part of the instant building”). The Plaintiff occupied the said building until now.
2. Determination
A. According to Article 197(1) of the Civil Act, the possessor of an article is presumed to have occupied the article as his/her owner’s intent. As such, in the event the possessor asserts prescription, he/she does not bear the burden of proving his/her own intent, and rather, he/she bears the burden of proving that the possessor’s possession has no intention to own.
2) In acquiring prescription, the intent that is the requirement for possession frequently is objectively based on the nature of the possessory right that is the cause of the acquisition.