1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

1. The reasoning for this court’s explanation is as follows: (a) the reasoning for the judgment of the court of first instance is the same as that for the judgment of the court of first instance, in addition to the following modifications or additions; and (b) thus, it refers to the reasoning for the judgment of the court

Part 3 through 12 of the judgment of the court of first instance are as follows: “The Act shall function only as part of 650.7 square meters (hereinafter referred to as “instant land”) to be located within the ship.”

The term “the land of this case” is connected with G apartment site without any special boundary. From the time of completion of G apartment, the part of the line connecting each point of the 4 to 16, and 1 points of the land of this case (hereinafter “the boundary line of this case”) is installed with boundary stone, retaining wall, stone embankment, etc., and the said stone embankment, etc. served as the boundary line between the site of G apartment and neighboring housing complex. The apartment site (including the land of this case) is located along the boundary line of the said stone embankment, etc., with the passage of G apartment residents, play areas, green space, etc. The apartment site (including the land of this case) was used as the passage roads, play areas, green space, etc. of G apartment residents. According to the above facts of recognition, G apartment residents recognized the land of this case as the site of G apartment and occupied the land of this case as the sectional owner of G apartment and the ownership of G apartment site as the owner of the ownership of G apartment site.”

(b)on Part 5 of the first instance judgment, the following shall be added to the nineth instance judgment:

1 The Plaintiff asserts that not only G apartment residents, but also Efrative residents, including the Plaintiff, have entered the instant land through part of the instant boundary line and used the instant land as a passage to G apartment commercial building, and therefore, Efrative owners, including the Plaintiff, have acquired the instant land by prescription.

First of all, the divided owners of E-Ireg enter the land of this case through the passage of some of the boundary lines of this case.