1. The Defendant indicated in the attached Form No. 1 through No. 17, 69, 70, 31 through 68, with respect to the land size of 15,225 square meters prior to C in a three-party city to the Plaintiff.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff’s tide D is the owner of 15,250 square meters prior to C before the subdivision (hereinafter “C before subdivision”).

B. D on September 15, 1972, sold to the Defendant a specific portion of C’s land before subdivision to the Defendant on September 15, 1972, and completed the registration of ownership transfer as to the portion of C’s land before subdivision to the Defendant on September 29, 1972.

C. D on August 31, 1981, on the remaining portion of C in the land before subdivision to the Plaintiff, D had completed the registration of transfer of leapons with respect to the remaining portion of C before subdivision.

Before subdivision, C was divided into E land in which 25 square meters of the land among the land was divided into three occasions on May 20, 2003.

E. At present, the Plaintiff occupies the portion (a) part (a) in a ship (hereinafter “part (a) in a ship which connects Nos. 17 through 17, 69, 70, 31 through 68, and 17 of the annexed drawing among the area of 15,25 square meters before C, which is divided. The Defendant occupies the portion (b) in a ship which connects Nos. 17 through 31, 70, 69, and 17 of the annexed drawing among the divided land (hereinafter “part (a) in a ship”) and 1,559 square meters (hereinafter “part (b) in a ship”) among the divided land.

[Ground of recognition] Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, Eul evidence Nos. 1 through 3, the result of the on-site inspection by this court, the result of the survey appraisal by this court, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The plaintiff's assertion

A. The part on the ship (A) and (c) of this case is dividedly owned by the plaintiff, and the part (b) of this case is dividedly owned by the defendant, and it is deemed that there was a mutual title trust relationship under divided ownership. The plaintiff declared that the title trust relationship with the defendant was terminated by the delivery of a copy of the complaint of this case.

B. Even if the part in a domestic house (C) is owned by the Defendant, since the Plaintiff occupied the part in the ship (a) and (c) from around 1970 to April 2015, the prescription period for acquisition by possession has expired.

C. Therefore, the defendant is obligated to implement the procedure for the registration of ownership transfer with respect to the defendant's share in the part (a) and (c) of the land in this case among the land in this case, to restore the part (c) to the original state, and to deliver the above land without permission.