logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 의정부지방법원 2016.02.16 2014나54961
토지인도 및 시설물철거
Text

1. All appeals filed by the Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) against the principal lawsuit and counterclaim are dismissed.

2. The appeal costs.

Reasons

1. The reasoning of the court's explanation concerning this case is as follows, except for the following, the part of "decision on the completion of the prescriptive prescription of 7th judgment of the court of first instance" is as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, and thus, it is citing it in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2) According to Article 245(1) of the Civil Act, the determination on the completion of acquisition by prescription is as follows: (a) a person who occupies real estate in peace and openly with an intention to own it for twenty (20) years acquires ownership by registering it; and (b) a possessor of an object is presumed to possess it as his/her own intention pursuant to Article 197(1) of the Civil Act; (c) in cases where the possessor claims acquisition by prescription, he/she does not bear the burden of proving his/her own intention; and (d) a person who denies the

However, the issue of whether the possessor’s possession is an independent possession with the intention of possession or with the intention of possession without the intention of possession is not determined by the internal deliberation of the possessor, but by the nature of the title that caused the acquisition of possession or by all circumstances related to the possession, and thus, it should be determined externally and objectively. Thus, it should be determined even if it is proved that the possessor acquired the possession based on the title that the possessor is deemed to have no intention of ownership due to its nature, or where it is proved that there was a circumstance to deem that the possessor did not have the intention of rejection of the ownership of another person and that the possessor did not have the intention of possession,

Therefore, the possessor has occupied the real estate owned by another person without permission knowing the fact that there is no legal act or other legal requirements that can be the cause of the acquisition of ownership at the time of the commencement of possession.

arrow