1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

1. Basic facts

A. On April 7, 2016, the Plaintiff entered into a contract with the Defendant to purchase KRW 20,000,000 of the Daegu-gun Road C (hereinafter “instant land”) from the Defendant for KRW 261 square meters (hereinafter “instant contract”). On April 18, 2016, the Defendant completed the registration of ownership transfer of the instant land to the Plaintiff on April 18, 2016.

B. The instant land is occupied by the achievement group and is used as roads.

The Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the Republic of Korea seeking the return of unjust enrichment on the instant land, and the first instance court (Seoul District Court Decision 2016Na306632) accepted the Plaintiff’s claim, but the appeal court ( Daegu District Court Decision 2017Na308710) accepted the defense of completion of the statute of limitations for the acquisition of possession by the military achieved in the appellate court (Seoul District Court Decision 20

Therefore, although the Plaintiff appealed, the appeal was dismissed, and the judgment became final and conclusive.

(hereinafter referred to as “instant case”). 【No dispute exists, Gap 1 through 4 (including paper numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply), Eul 1, and the purport of the whole pleadings.

2. The assertion and judgment

A. 1) The Plaintiff’s assertion 1) The achievement group prior to the Defendant’s sale of the instant land by prescription acquired the instant land to the Plaintiff, and the Defendant sold it to the Plaintiff, and the Plaintiff was merely an owner of the instant land without the ability to benefit, and the Plaintiff also became unable to exercise the right to dispose of the land upon the completion of the statute of limitations due to the final and conclusive judgment on the instant case. Since the Plaintiff was unable to obtain full ownership due to the Defendant’s failure to perform his duty to transfer ownership, the Plaintiff’s rescission of the instant sales contract. Accordingly, the Defendant is obliged to pay the Plaintiff the purchase price of the instant land and the litigation cost of the instant related case. 2) After the expiration of the statute of limitations for the acquisition of the instant land by prescription,