Suwon District Court Sungnam Branch 2012Gahap392 (O7.03, 2013)

The possession and management for not less than ten years after the cancellation of the title trust relationship and the registration of preservation of ownership has been made is a valid registration.

The title trust relationship is terminated explicitly or implicitly, the registration of ownership preservation has been made in the name of a clan, and it is a valid registration consistent with the substantive legal relationship due to the acquisition by prescription for possession or the completion of prescription for acquisition by prescription through peace and public performance with the intention of ownership without negligence.

Article 24 of the National Tax Collection Act

2013Na2000088 Cancellation, etc. of registration of initial ownership

CO

Korea

Suwon District Court Decision 2012Gahap392 decided July 3, 2013

September 22, 2014

December 15, 2014

1. The part of the judgment of the first instance against the defendant OO bank and the Republic of Korea shall be revoked;

2. The plaintiff's claims against the defendant Obank and Korea are all dismissed.

3. The Plaintiff’s appeal against the Defendants other than the Defendant OO Bank and the Republic of Korea is dismissed.

4. The plaintiff, defendant OO bank, and the Republic of Korea shall bear the total litigation costs incurred between the plaintiff and the defendant Obank, and the plaintiff's appeal costs against the remaining defendants except for the Republic of Korea.

1. Purport of claim

As shown in the attached list No. 2 (the plaintiff voluntarily withdrawn the lawsuit against Defendant OO Insurance Co., Ltd. on September 22, 2014 at the date of pleading of September 2, 2014).

2. Purport of appeal

A. The plaintiff

In the judgment of the first instance court, the part of the judgment against the Defendants other than the Defendant Co., Ltd. and the Republic of Korea shall be revoked. The remainder of the Defendants except the Defendant Co., Ltd. and the Republic of Korea shall be claimed as indicated in the attached Table 2.

B. The purport of the appeal by the defendant OO Bank and Korea

See paragraphs 1 and 2.

1. Basic facts

(a) Land assessment, preservation of ownership, etc.;

1) 분할 전 경기 OO군 OO면 OO리 산 OO 임야 6정 3단 6무보(이하 '이 사건 사정토지'라고 한다. '경기 OO군 OO면 OO리'는 나중에 '경기 OO시 OO면 OO리'로 행정구역 명칭이 변경되었다. 이하 모두 변경된 행정구역으로 표시하되, '경기 OO시 OO면'은 생략한다)는 19OO.(大正 7년) 12. 6.경 주소지의 기재 없이 류AA(柳世永)이 사정받은 것으로 토지조사부(갑 제1호증)에 기재되어 있다. 이 사건 사정토지에 대한 지적공부는 6・25 전란으로 소실되었다.

2) The instant assessment land was later divided into O-1 forest O-1 forest 6 o-1 forest 6 o-2 o-2 forest o-2 forest o-2 forest o-2 forest o-2 forest o-2 forest o-2 (hereinafter “the instant land 1”).

3) On December 20, 1971, the registration of preservation of ownership was completed in the name of AA under the AA type No. 15,883 under the receipt of OO District Court OO Registry (hereinafter referred to as OO Registry) on the land partitioned in the instant case.

4) In addition, registration conversion was made with OOO-1 forest land of 436 square meters around 1953 with respect to the land partitioned in the instant case, and registration preservation was made in the name of B B as the receipt of OO registry office on January 19, 1985.

B. Subdivision of the partitioned land of this case and transfer registration of ownership, etc.

1) On May 24, 1995 subdivisions

On May 24, 1995, the land partitioned in the instant case was subdivided into O-1 forest land of 2,740 square meters, O-2 forest land of O-3 forest land of O-3 forest land of 0,633 square meters.

2) POOO-1 Forest land of 2,740 square meters and transfer registration, etc. of ownership

A) The course of subdivision

(1) On May 25, 1995, OO-1 forest land of 2,740 square meters was converted into 2,729 square meters for OO-1 miscellaneous land of 2,729 square meters. On November 2003, OO-1 miscellaneous land of 779 square meters, OOO-14 miscellaneous land of 1,385 square meters, and OO-15 miscellaneous land of 545 square meters.

(2) Among them, the 1,385 square meters of OO-14 miscellaneous land was again subdivided into 400 square meters of OO-14 miscellaneous land on February 3, 2004, 478 square meters of OO-17 miscellaneous land, 280 square meters of OO-O miscellaneous land, 280 square meters of OO-O miscellaneous land, and 201 square meters of O-19 miscellaneous land.

(3) In addition, the 779 square meters for OO-1 miscellaneous land was changed on January 31, 2008; the 400 square meters for OO-14 miscellaneous land on February 3, 2004; the 478 square meters for OO-17 miscellaneous land on March 29, 2004; and the 00 square meters for OO-19 miscellaneous land on February 3, 2004; and the 201 square meters for OO-19 miscellaneous land on February 3, 2004.

(4) The following shall be arranged in the table of such subdivisions.

(b)registration of ownership transfer, etc.

The registration, such as the entry in the claim in attached Form 2 concerning each of the above lands after the above registration conversion, subdivision, and land category change, has been completed, and the same shall be re-established in the table as follows:

(i)common registration:

(b) Registration by land:

3) The registration of ownership transfer, etc. of subdivisions of OO-2 forest OOO-2

A) The course of subdivision

(1) OO-2 Forest OOO-2 Forest Subdivision was subdivided on October 31, 2002 into OO-2 forest O-2 forest O-4 forest OOO-2 forest m2, and the above OO-2 forest O-2 forest m2 forest m2 was subdivided into OO-2 forest OOm2 on November 1, 2002.

(2) In addition, on April 22, 2004, the above O-2 O-2 С was 200 square meters of O-2 forest, O-2 forest, O-6 forest, O-7 forest, O-7 forest, O-8 forest, O-9 forest land, O-9 forest land, O-9 forest land, O-1000 square meters, O-2 forest, 000000,0000,0000,0000,0000,0000,000,000,000,000 was 2,000 square meters, 2,0000,000,0000,000,000,00 was 1,000,000,000,000,000

(3) On November 15, 2011, the above OO-2 Forest OO-7 forest land was re-divided into OOO-OO-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-use forest land size on November 17, 201.

(4) On October 31, 2002, the above OO-4 forest land was converted into O-4 forest land for the registration of conversion on October 31, 2002, and after the registration was divided into O-4 forest land and O-5 forest land for the same day, the land category was changed to the same site on the same day.

(5) On November 1, 2002, the above OO-5 Forest OOOO-5 Forest land was divided into OOOOOOOOOOOO-5 forest land size on the same day and divided into OOO-5 forest land size on the same day. On the same day, OOO-5 forest land size was divided into 681 square meters, and OOO-8 forest land size was changed into 681 square meters, while OOOO-8 forest land size was changed into OOO-5 forest land.

(6) On November 15, 2011, the above OO-7 forest land was converted into O-8 forest land into O-O00 square meters on November 15, 201, and thereafter was divided into O-8 forest land and 41 square meters on November 17, 201, O-8 forest land, O-13 forest land and O-14 forest land into O-3 square meters on November 17, 201.

(7) On November 15, 2011, the above OO-8 Forest land is an O-9 Forest land for 580 square meters, and the above O-9 forest land is an O-9 forest land for 4,132 square meters on November 15, 201, and the above O-O-10 forest land is an O-10 forest land for O-10 forest land for 302 square meters on November 15, 201, respectively, and the above O-O-10 forest land is converted into 304 square meters on November 15, 201.

(8) The following are arranged in the table of such subdivisions.

B. Registration of transfer of ownership

The registration of each of the above lands after the change of land category has been made, such as the entry in the purport of the claim in attached Table 2, and if the land is re-divided in the table, it shall be as follows:

(i)common registration:

(b) Registration by land:

4) OOO-3 Forest land of 2,633 square meters and transfer of ownership, etc.

A) Process of subdivision

(1) On October 29, 2002, the number of OO-3 forest land 2,633 square meters was divided into KRW 670 square meters in O-6 forest land, OO-6 forest land, OO-9 forest land, OO-10 forest land, OO-1 forest land and 854 square meters in O-1 forest land on the same day.

(2) Thereafter, OO-6 Forest land of 670 square meters was changed into a road on March 20, 2003, while OO-9 Forest land of 195 square meters was changed into a road.

(3) On May 17, 2003, the above O-O-10 Forest land was divided into O-O-10 Forest land and O-11 square meters for O-13 forest land. On the same day, O-O-10 forest land was converted into land, while O-O-13 forest land was converted into land.

(4) In addition, the above O-10 large 965 square meters were subdivided into O. O. O. O-O-10 large 482 square meters and O-16 large 483 square meters on November 2003, and the above O-O-10 large 482 square meters were subdivided into O-10 large 482 square meters on August 8, 2007.

(5) The following are arranged in the table of such subdivisions.

B. Registration of transfer of ownership

The registration of each of the above lands after the change of land category has been completed, such as the entries in the purport of the claim in the attached Form, and if the land is re-divided in the table, it shall be as follows:

(i)common registration:

(b) Registration by land:

(c) Integration, division, etc. of clans;

1) Three children were in the group B of OOC OOO OB. Among them, a clan whose joint group of South-NamnCC (BB) is 'BB', a clan whose joint group of South-Namn DD (AA) is 'BB', and 3 South Doo was the two Doo Doo Doo Do, which is the birth of a species Doo Doo Do, and the clan grouped by the joint group was 'D Doo.'

2) However, the descendants of the BB cooperation consisting of less than the number of members of the CC and have been working as a single clan, such as setting up a "AA species" which is being integrated with several members of the CC and selecting one chairperson, and managing the property of the above clans. The object of the task was three to three members of the O including the OO, and the descendants of the O members of the OD were not present at the OO's proposal, while the descendants of the O members were members of the O members of the next clans in full integration. However, the rules of the merged species were enacted on April 10, 197.1)

3) From the death of the O to the date of the death of the O, the AA species, which continued to remain in existence with the OO's intention, discussed the agenda that the descendants of the AA will separate from the merged species at the ordinary meeting held on November 14, 2002 (OO October 10), and decided to delegate the detailed matters concerning the above agenda to the board of directors, and the general affairs E delegated the board of directors to deal with the matters, and decided to have the executive officers of the AA and the descendants of the AA.m. jointly with the decision to revise the name as the "Amm Union" in the sense that the AAmms still remains in existence with an independent strike (O No. 12-2). After this process, the Amsols became a member of the Ams Union and became an objective clan that became a member of the Ams Union since it became a member of the Ams Union at that time.

4) The seat of the president and the office of the former Class A, a representative of the AA type, was the seat of the president and the office of the BB type, and the name of the A type changed to that of the Defendant “A type” after that.

5) After that, according to the resolution of the general meeting of the above consolidated clans, each of the officers of the above consolidated clans, who were officers of the AA and BB, and each of the officers of the BB, on March 7, 2003, the representatives of each clans agreed on the waiver of the rights of the Class B to the remaining land on the condition that the above OO Risan No. 19 of the forest No. 7,000 among the land for which the registration of preservation of ownership has been made to AA in the name of the AA among the land for which the registration of preservation of ownership has been made (No. 12-5 of the evidence No. 12).

As a clan with a unique meaning naturally established by descendants, the objective substance of the pre-integrated clan does not disappear (see Supreme Court Decision 2008Da41567, Oct. 9, 2008).

(d) Inheritance relations; and

1) On January 21, 1924, the Plaintiff’s high-help Division A (No. 193 of this title) died, and the head, South Korea, succeeded to the property of the above Chapter A at the same time as the family inheritance.

2) On November 15, 1954, the above Category EE succeeded to the property of the said Category EE.

3) In the meantime, the above Chapter F died on September 4, 1965, the wife and children of the SouthO and children of the Republic of Korea jointly succeeded to the inheritance of the Category GG (CG, Plaintiff’s father, HH (2 South), Chapter II (3 South), JJ (ma), HaK (2 Women), HamK (3 Women), HamM (4 South), NN (4 women).

4) 이후 류GG이 1994. 8. 4. 사망하여 처인 김OO와 자녀들인 원고(장남), 류OO(2남), 류PP(3남), 류QQ(4남)이 류GG의 재산을 공동상속하였다.

5) In addition, on June 28, 2003, the above 8 South son, who died on June 28, 2003, jointly succeeded to the property of South O (the inheritance of the Category 4 GG that died, such as laver and the Plaintiff), and on February 23, 2010, Kim O died on February 23, 2010, 4 siblings such as the Plaintiff, etc. jointly succeeded to the property of Kim O.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap's 1 to 13,O, 25 toO, 31 evidence, Eul's 1 and 29 evidence (including each number), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination as to the cause of action

A. Whether the assessment title of the assessment land of the instant case and whether the Plaintiff’s prior domicile are the same person

In full view of the above facts, 1. A, which is the name of the Plaintiff’s owner and the Land Survey Book, is identical, 2. According to No. 4 (Land Survey Book) of the Rules of the Provisional Land Survey Bureau (repealed No. 33, 1913) and No. 2, etc., if the owner’s address and the land are identical, the address is omitted in preparing land survey books, and if there are two persons within the same administrative district of Dong/Ri, the name of the Defendants was stated in the name of the address of the same person (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 2011Du1243, Oct. 10, 201; 2010OO66, Mar. 24, 2011).

B. Succession to the rights and obligations of the defendant clan

1. According to the above-mentioned facts (c). Since November 14, 2002, from among the above consolidated species, the members of the AA among the members of the AA were set up only by the members of the AB, and the objective substance of the AA among the members of the AB was extinguished as the members of the AB were changed into the same entity as that of the defendant B, and accordingly, the objective substance of the AA among the above combined species was extinguished. Accordingly, the defendant A among the above combined species was led to the legal tradition of the AA among the above combined species and succeeded to all rights and obligations (hereinafter referred to as the "the defendant clan").

C. Circumstances and the validity of each registration of ownership preservation in the name of the defendant clan

1) A person registered in the Land Survey Book as an owner is presumed to have become final and conclusive, inasmuch as there is no reflective evidence, such as that the content of the land was changed by an adjudication, etc., and thus, a person who is presumed to be the owner of the land is presumed to have acquired the land in the original condition. The presumption of registration of preservation of ownership is broken if it is found that a person other than the holder of the relevant preservation registration was found to have received the relevant land assessment (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 200

2) We examine the instant case in light of the aforementioned legal principles. Each registration of preservation of ownership in the name of the Defendant clan with respect to the land of this case Nos. 1 and 2, as seen above, is revealed to be different from that of the Plaintiff’s fleet A, insofar as the circumstance of each of the lands prior to the division of each of the instant lands has been revealed to be the name of the Plaintiff

D. Sub-determination

1) As seen above, inasmuch as the presumption of registration of ownership preservation in the name of the defendant clan has been broken, if the defendant clan did not assert and prove otherwise that each of the above registrations of ownership preservation conforms to the substantive relations because the defendant clan succeeded to and acquired the land in the first and second instances from the defendant clans or its successors, the registration of ownership preservation in the name of the defendant clans shall be deemed null and void. Therefore, in the case of the defendant clans who are the right holder of registration of ownership preservation or the defendant clans who comprehensively succeeded to the rights and obligations of the defendant clans or their successors, the above registration of ownership preservation shall be cancelled, unless there are special circumstances.

2) In addition, the registration of cancellation of ownership transfer, registration of the establishment of neighboring superficies, and registration of the establishment of superficies, as stated in the purport of the claim concerning each of the lands entered in the land partitioned in Section 1 of this case, based on the registration of cancellation of the above cause of the Defendant clan as to the land partitioned in Section 1 of this case, shall be deemed invalid. Therefore, each of the above Defendants, barring special circumstances, is obligated to perform the procedure for registration of cancellation of ownership transfer, etc. to the Plaintiff seeking cancellation as an act of preservation on the jointly owned property (However, as for the purport of the claim, the above OO-13 square meters of forest land and O-13 square meters of forest land and O-14 forest land and O-13 square meters of forest land are omitted).

3) Furthermore, as to the cancellation of the registration of provisional seizure on the above OO-13 square meters of O-13 forest O-14 forest O-O4 forest O-O4 forest OO-O4 forest O-O4 forest OO-O4, Defendant Republic of Korea is obligated to accept the registration of provisional seizure on the cancellation of the registration of the transfer of ownership in the name of the Defendant clan. Defendant O-O-14 forest 1,983 square meters of the above OO-OO-O's right to collateral security claim against Defendant O-O-O, who completed the seizure registration on the cancellation of the registration of the transfer of ownership in the above O-O-O-O-13 road 11 square meters of O-O-O-O3 road, and is a third party with interest in each registration on the cancellation of the registration of the transfer of ownership in the name of O-O-O-O-O-13 road.

3. Judgment on the defendants' assertion

A. Summary of the defendants' assertion

1) The instant assessment land was originally integrated land A, and at the time of December 6, 190, the title trust was terminated for the instant land, and each registration of ownership preservation was made in the name of the Class B B B B on December 20, 1985 for the instant land, in the name of the AA on December 20, 1971 for the instant land, and in the name of the B B on January 19, 1985 for the instant land.

2) Even if the instant assessment land is not a real estate in title trust in Category A, even if it is not a real estate in title trust in Category A, since the acquisition by prescription or the acquisition by prescription for acquisition by an ombudsman has been completed by occupying the land in Category A for not less than 1, 20 years as the intention to own the divided land in Category B, and thus, the registration of preservation of ownership in each name in Category B and Category B of Category B of the instant case was effective in accordance with the substantive legal relationship. Based on this, the registration is valid in accordance with the substantive relationship, such as the registration of ownership transfer in the said Defendants’ name, the registration of creation of neighboring superficies, and the registration of creation of superficies, etc., of each land divided out in Category A and

B. Whether the land under the instant circumstances constitutes the land under title trust as owned by the Class AA

1) Relevant legal principles

A) The parties asserting that certain property is a clan property shall assert and prove the circumstances leading up to the establishment of the clan property. However, it is sufficient to view that certain property does not necessarily include an explicit organization, and that the circumstance of establishment is about the assertion and certification of clan property, and if it is possible to confirm the requirement by asserting and proving indirect facts, it is sufficient (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 94Da48820, Jul. 11, 1995; 2006Da68506, Feb. 22, 2007; 2006Da68506, Feb. 7, 2007; 200; 700, Jun. 7, 2007; 207, if certain land is owned by members of the clan or third party; 70, if it is proved that the land was owned by a clan or third party; 7, if it is not deemed that it was owned by a clan or third party in the name of a clan; and 7, it is sufficiently related materials to be established.

B) However, in the instant case, there is no evidence to prove the fact that AA was directly trusted the land of this case to the network category A at the time of the circumstance, and in conclusion, whether the land of this case was the substantial ownership of the land of this case and completed the circumstances with the trust of the name to the network category A as the real ownership of the land of this case should be determined by whether it is sufficient to recognize that A had acquired the land of this case in the instant case, and how there is any material of the facts opposed thereto, by examining various indirect materials cited in the foregoing legal doctrine.

(ii) the facts of recognition

A) A, the assessment title of the assessment of the instant assessment land, served as the head of O in the Japanese colonial era, and was in a position to represent the AA species in the process of integration as the end descendants of AA.

B) In addition to the land of this case, the land for which registration of preservation of ownership has been made in the name of the defendant clan, although the name of the defendant clan was assessed under the sole name of the defendant clan, there

As to the above OO-1 forest and O-2 forest and 12 forest and O-2 forest were divided in the above land, registration of preservation of ownership was made in the name of AA on March 21, 1994 with respect to 210-3 large 130 square meters from the above OO-1 forest and land, and registration of preservation of ownership was made in the name of AA on December 31, 196, with respect to O-2 forest and O-2 forest and 130 square meters.

다) 이 사건 제1 분할 토지에 대하여 1966. 12. 31. 구 지적법(1975. 12. 31. 법률 제2801호로 전문개정되기 전의 것. 이하 '구 지적법'이라 한다) 시행 당시 구 임야대장이 임의로 복구되었는데, 그 구 임야대장에는 'AA 종중 대표 류OO'이 소유자로 기재되어 있다(다만, 당초 류■■ 외 OO인이 19OO. 12. 6. 사정받은 것으로 기재되었다가 류AA으로 정정되었다).

그리고 위 산 OO 임야에서 나온 위 OO리 210-3 대 OO0평에 관하여 1958. 12. 20. 구 임야대장이 임의로 복구되었는데, 그 구 임야대장에도 류■■ 외 23인이 소유자로 기재되어 있다.

D) The land for which a Chapter A was under joint situation with other members of the clan, but a registration of preservation of ownership has been made in the name of the defendant clan, has the following land:

(1) 위 OO리 산 19 임야 33정 1단 8무보에 관하여 류△△(AA공파 31세), 류AA(AA공파 32세), 류■■(AA공파 33세), 류▲▲(AA공파 33세) 명의로 사정 받았는데, 1971. 12. 20. AA종중 명의로 소유권보존등기가 경료되었다.

(2) 위 OO면 OO리 산 62 임야 4정 2단 8무보와 위 OO리 산 69 임야 2정 2무보에 관하여 류AA, 류■■ 명의로 각 사정 받았는데, 1971. 11. OO. AA공파 명의로 소유권보존등기가 각 경료되었다.

E) In addition, there are the following lands for which the registration of ownership transfer has been completed in the name of the defendant clan by being considered in the name of an individual of the clan other than the clan A.

(1) 위 OO리 OO 전 448평, OO리 OO6 대 483평, OO리 282 전 252평, OO리 324 답 114평, OO리 4OO 답 972평, OO리 OO5 전 214평에 관하여 류▽▽ 명의로 사정받았는데, 1922. 8. 28. 류▽▽의 부친인 류■■ 명의로 소유권보존등기가 경료된 후, 1923. 8. 21. 종중을 대표하는 류☆☆ 외 5인 명의로 소유권이전등기가 경료되었다가, 1981. 8. 28. BB종중 앞으로 소유권이전등기가 경료되었다.

(2) 위 OO리 209 대 298평, OO리 212 대 144평에 관하여 위 류■■ 명의로 사정받았는데, 1922. 1. 25. 류■■ 명의로 소유권보존등기가 경료된 후, 1923. 8. 21. 종중을 대표하는 류☆☆ 외 5인 명의로 소유권이전등기가 경료되었다가, 1981. 8. 28. BB종중 앞으로 소유권이전등기가 경료되었다.

(3) 위 OO리 198 답 750평에 관하여 류AA의 친동생인 류★★ 명의로 사정 받았는데, 위 류★★ 명의로 소유권보존등기가 경료된 후, 1923. 8. 21. 종중을 대표하는 류☆☆ 외 5인 명의로 소유권이전등기가 경료되었다가, 1981. 8. 28. BB종중 앞으로 소유권이전등기가 경료되었다.

F) Meanwhile, in addition to the instant situation land and the above OOOO land, there were 4 OO-ri 1 o-ri O-ri O-ri 4 O-ri 2 O-ri O-ri 5 6 o-ri 3 o-ri 5 o-ri o-ri o-ri O-ri 4 O-ri 4 O-ri O-ri 4 O-ri 4 O-ri 5 O-ri 6 o-ri o-ri 5 o-ri o-ri o-ri o-ri o-ri 5 o-ri o-

In addition, Chapter A was investigated into several parcels of farmland in its own name, other than the above forests and fields. On April 14, 1922, 1922, registration of preservation of ownership was completed on several parcels of farmland in the name of O6, 459, O7, 81, O17, 217, and 538, etc., and registration of preservation of ownership was completed on September 6, 1923 at 441, OOOOO, 504, 171, 171, OOOOOO, 291, respectively.

The Chapter A served as the head of the O in the Japanese colonial era, as above, and the Chapter FFF, who was his son, served as the head of OO in the 1950s, served as the office of OO in the 1950s (Evidence A16-1). However, unlike the above land where the successors of the above Chapter A or the above Chapter FF and the Plaintiff have completed registration of preservation of ownership in the name of Chapter A or Chapter E E before the instant lawsuit was filed, there is no evidence that there was a right assertion that it would have naturally been expected that the owner would have been the owner, such as completing registration of preservation of ownership, etc. with respect to the land and the above Chapter F and the above O forest, or exercising substantial rights with respect to them.

G) Rather, as seen in paragraph (3) of the above 1. Basic Fact C. C. 3, among the real estate under the name of B B B B, the Plaintiff entered into a direct agreement as a representative of AA, and approved the agreement as a director of B B and A, on November 14, 2002, on the condition that the purchase price of OOO was paid out of the real estate under the name of B B and B, on the condition that the Plaintiff would be paid out all rights to other real estate under the name of B and OOO among the real estate under the name of B.

In addition, according to the above agreement, the plaintiff et al. was paid KRW 00 million for the sale price of OOOO in the above OOOOO in accordance with the above agreement.

As such, the Plaintiff and the Plaintiff’s lodging room, O-1 forest O-2 forest OO-2 forest OO-3 forest OO-3 forest O9, etc. have been treated as owned by AAA during the course of selling the said O-O-2 forest O-2 forest O-3 forest O-9 forest 19 forest 19 forest O-2 from the land partitioned into the instant land. Furthermore, the Plaintiff and the Plaintiff’s lodging room, O-2 forest O-2 forest O-3 forest O-3 forest O-7 forest O-7 forest 19 forest O-7 forest O-7, etc. were actively involved in the process of dividing the said O-O-2 forest O-2 forest O-2 forest O-O-2 during the instant type of land into several lots.

H) OOrisan 19 Forest land is an OOrisan 19 forest land, and it was unfavorable to Orisan forest, which is the land of this case. According to the division land of this case, O-9 forest, and O-13 forest land of this case, five graves for AAri clan clan clans were installed on the land of this case and the above 19 forest land had been installed on the ground that the 19th land of this case and the above 19th land had been established on the ground that there was five seedlings for the clan clans for the clans of the defendant clans and AA, which were integrated into the above circumstances [O District Court Decision 2006Ga16706 decided Dec. 21, 207 (Evidence No. 166-1). According to the above circumstances, most of the OO's forest and field possessed by AO and the above 19th OO, and the above 19th OOO's forest and field.

I) During that period, Defendant clan paid all taxes and public charges on the instant land Nos. 1 and 2, etc., and the heirs of Plaintiff or the SimA did not pay them.

그리고 이 사건 제1, 2 분할 토지 산자락에서 1940년대부터 2003년대까지 5〜6가구가 집을 짓고 살았는데, 피고 종중이 그동안 위 주민들로부터 토지 임대료를 받아왔다.

[Ground for recognition] Gap evidence 12-1 through 5, Eul evidence 20-1 through 20, Eul evidence 21-1, 2, Eul evidence 22-1, 2, Eul evidence 1-23, Eul evidence 1-2, Eul evidence 2-2, Eul evidence 3, Eul evidence 4-1 through 5-5, Eul evidence 6-1, 6-3, Eul evidence 8, Eul evidence 10-1 through 8, Eul evidence 10-1, Eul evidence 10-2, Eul evidence 12-1, 2-3, Eul evidence 2-1, Eul evidence 4, Eul evidence 2-1, Eul evidence 2-1, Eul evidence 12-1, 2-3, Eul evidence 13-1, 13-4, Eul evidence 5-1, Eul evidence 5-2, Eul evidence 6-1, 5-1-1, 5-1, 5-1-Ga evidence 6-1, 5-1-Ga evidence 4, 7

3) Determination

A) The facts found in the above 2. 1.C. (2) as seen in the above 1. 2. The descendants of the AA.m. were less than the number of the descendants of the A.m., which formed three through three groups including OO, and have been engaged in activities with an organic substance since the situation of the land of this case was already established before, and there is sufficient room to regard that the land of this case or the land of this case 1, 2 was owned by the AA, and was under the name of the deceased Class A, and was subject to the registration of ownership preservation in the name of the defendant clan, explicitly or implicitly terminated the above title trust relationship and made the registration of ownership preservation (the expression of the termination of title trust to the inheritors of the AA's heir on December 1, 197 or on December 198, 195).

나) 한편, 이 사건 사정토지를 종중원 여러 사람 명의가 아닌 종손인 류AA 단독 명의로 사정받았다는 사정만으로는 이 사건 사정토지가 사정명의인인 종손 개인 또는 종손 집안의 재산이라는 근거가 된다고 보기 어렵다. 1910. 5. 25.에 작성된 소유증명신청서와 보증서(갑 제15호증)에 의하면, 위 OO봉(OO리 산 19 임야)의 소유자가 '종중대표인 류■■'으로 표시되어 있는 반면 그 서쪽 산(OO리 산 OO 임야)에 대해서는 '류AA 산'으로만 표시되어 있으나, 위 문서는 사정 당시의 것이 아닐 뿐만 아니라 위와 같은 소유증명신청 당시 종중 소유 토지의 경우에는 반드시 종중 소유임을 표시하는 것이라고 볼 만한 자료도 없다. 따라서 위 소유증명신청서와 보증서에 서쪽 산(OO리 산 OO 임야)에 관하여 '종중' 또는 '종중재산'의 병기가 없다고 해서 이를 종중 소유의 임야가 아니라고 보기는 어렵다. 그리고 갑 제16호증의 1, 2의 각 기재에 의하면 피고 종중의 대표자인 류이 2001. 6.경 CC공파종중의 대표자인 류YY으로부터 류11의 증조부인 류22이 사정명의인의 1인으로 되어 있는 토지에 관하여 피고 종중이 아무런 승낙없이 소유권이전등기를 한 데 대한 항의를 받고, 위 류ZZ에게 그 잘못을 인정한 적이있는 사실을 인정할 수 있으나, 이러한 사정 역시 이 사건 사정토지가 사정명의인인 류AA의 개인재산이었다는 점을 뒷받침할 간접자료가 될 수 없다. 그 밖에 원고가 들고 있는 사항들만으로는 이 사건 사정토지가 원고 종중의 소유로서 사정 당시 류AA에게 명의신탁된 것이라는 사실을 인정하는 데에 방해가 되는 간접자료가 될 수 없거나 그러한 자료가 되기에는 부족하다.

C) In full view of the contents examined in the above (A) and (b), registration of preservation of ownership in the name of the defendant clan with respect to the land 1 and 2 of this case shall be deemed valid registration that conforms to the substantive legal relationship. Based on the comprehensive succession of the rights of the defendant clans, the defendant clans comprehensively succeeded to the rights of the AA, and based on this, each of the lands listed in the claim in the division 1 of this case, as stated in the purport of the claim, shall be deemed effective registration that conforms to the substantive relationship. Accordingly, the defendants' defenses are with merit.

C. Whether the prescriptive acquisition of the land divided from the instant land was completed

1) Relevant legal principles

A) According to Article 197(1) of the Civil Act, the possessor of an object is presumed to have occupied the object as his/her own intent. Therefore, in cases where the possessor asserts the prescriptive acquisition, he/she does not bear the burden of proving his/her own intention. Rather, he/she bears the burden of proving the possessor’s possession without the intention of possession (see, e.g., Supreme Court en banc Decision 95Da28625, Aug. 21, 1997).

B) However, in order to recognize the prescriptive acquisition of the real estate register in accordance with Article 245(2) of the Civil Act, the requirements that the registered owner occupied the real estate in good faith with the intention of ownership for ten years, and that there is no negligence at the beginning of possession. The burden of proof as to this negligence lies in the assertion of the prescriptive acquisition of the registry (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 86Meu280, May 1986).

C) Meanwhile, in a case where a registered titleholder continues to be identical during the period of prescriptive acquisition, it is sufficient to deem the starting point of reckoning the prescriptive acquisition between places and the point at which it is possible to claim the completion of the prescriptive acquisition between them, and on the other hand, the completion of the prescriptive acquisition can be asserted by using the starting point as the starting point (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 97Da34037, May 12, 1998). Furthermore, the starting point of the prescriptive acquisition is not a major fact directly necessary for the judgment on legal effect, but an indirect fact, and thus, the court is not bound by the parties’ assertion, and the starting point of possession can be recognized by the litigation document (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2012Da68163, Nov. 29,

2) Determination

A) We examine the case in light of the above legal principles. In full view of the facts acknowledged in Section 3.b. 2 above, from December 20, 1971, the date of the registration of ownership preservation with respect to the land of Section 1 of this case, it appears that from January 19, 1985, the date of the registration of ownership preservation with respect to the land of Section 2 of this case, the possession of the land of this case was carried out as a final mountain, without negligence, and it was presumed that the possession was peaceful and publicly performed with the intention of its owner. Therefore, with respect to the land of Section 1 of this case, the acquisition by prescription with respect to the land of Section 1 of this case was completed on December 20, 1981 after the lapse of 10 years from December 20, 1971, and the acquisition by prescription with respect to the above Class A of Section 1 of this case was completed on December 19, 198.

B) Therefore, even if there is not sufficient evidence to regard the land division Nos. 1 and 2 of this case as the real estate under title trust during the AA, registration of preservation of ownership in the name of the defendant clan as to the land division Nos. 1 and 2 of this case was made effective in accordance with the substantive legal relationship due to the acquisition by prescription or the completion of prescription for acquisition of the register. Based on this, the defendant clan comprehensively succeeded to the rights of the AA, and based on this, the registration is valid in accordance with all the substantive relations, such as the registration of ownership in the name of the remaining defendants, the registration of creation of a neighboring superficies, and the registration of creation of superficies, as stated in the claims regarding each land divided out of the land division No. 1 of this case.

C) As to this, the Plaintiff re-claimed that the possession of the AA constitutes the possession of a third party, but it is difficult to recognize that the Defendant clan occupied the possession of the land of this case without permission by knowing that the Plaintiff had no legitimate title as to the land of this case 1 and 2, and there is no other evidence to support that the presumption of possession of the said autonomous possession was reversed. Accordingly, the Plaintiff’s aforementioned assertion is without merit.

4. Conclusion

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim against the defendants shall be dismissed in its entirety as it is without merit. Since the part of the judgment of the court of first instance against the defendant O bank and the Republic of Korea against the defendant O bank is unfair, it shall be revoked and the plaintiff's claim against the defendant O bank and the Republic of Korea shall be dismissed. And the appeal against the defendants other than the defendant O bank and the Republic of Korea shall be dismissed in its entirety as it is without merit.