1. The part concerning the conjunctive claim in the judgment of the first instance is modified as follows:

The Defendants are the Plaintiff.

1. The court's explanation on this part of the facts of recognition is the same as the corresponding part of the judgment of the court of first instance, and thus, citing this as it is in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the

2. The first instance court dismissed the plaintiff's primary claim, and since the plaintiff did not appeal against the primary claim, the primary claim does not fall under the scope of the trial court's decision.

3. Judgment on the conjunctive claim

A. A. The summary of the allegations by the parties 1) The Plaintiff’s assertion adopted the Plaintiff as the de facto adoptee around September 1970, and the Plaintiff donated each of the instant land to the Plaintiff on the ground that around September 1982, the Plaintiff: (a) occupied each of the instant land as the intention to own it for not less than 20 years after delivery of each of the instant land; (b) the Defendants are obligated to complete the registration of ownership transfer on each of the instant land on the ground of the completion of the prescriptive prescription; (c) the land 1, 3 was the land on which the Deceased was the Plaintiff’s death before and after the Deceased’s death; and (d) the Defendants leased and occupied the land to a third party after the Deceased’s death. (b) The Plaintiff did not possess each of the instant land.

Even if the Plaintiff did not receive the donation of each of the instant lands from the Deceased, the Plaintiff’s possession is nothing more than the possession of the owner.

C) Even if the Plaintiff received a private donation on July 13, 200, when the deceased died, the effect of the private donation occurred, and thus, it has been recognized as possession from that time to that time. Accordingly, the prescriptive acquisition has not been completed since 20 years have not passed thereafter. (B) The following circumstances are as follows: (a) the judgment on each of the instant 1, 3 land was included in the evidence Nos. 6, 7, 11, and 16, and the purport of the entire pleadings was added, namely, the two-year value of the instant land on July 9, 201 (200, 201) by Defendant B after the deceased’s death.