1. All of the plaintiff's main claims that the court changed in exchange are dismissed.

2.The Court.

1. The reasons why this court shall explain this part of the basic facts are as follows: “Defendant” is “Defendant, D, E”, “Defendant C” is “Defendant,” “Defendant D” is “D”, and “Defendant E” is the same as the corresponding part of the judgment of the first instance, except where “Defendant E” is used as “E”, and thus, it is acceptable in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. Judgment on the main claim

A. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion, Q, P, occupied F land before subdivision and G land before subdivision for twenty (20) years from July 21, 1970 to July 20, 190, and acquired the right to claim the registration of transfer of ownership based on the completion of the statute of limitations for possession as to each of the above land. Since the Plaintiff received the right to claim the registration of transfer of ownership based on the completion of the statute of limitations for possession from Q and P around August 2010, as well as the right to claim the registration of transfer of ownership based on the completion of the statute of limitations for possession, the Defendant is obligated to implement the procedure for the registration of transfer of ownership as described in the primary purport of the claim.

B. (1) On July 20, 1990, the Plaintiff’s above claim is premised on the Plaintiff’s acquisition of the right to claim for ownership transfer registration based on the completion of the statute of limitations for acquisition of possession as to each of the above lands by occupying the F and R’s land prior to subdivision and G land from July 21, 1970 to July 20, 190. Thus, the Plaintiff’s above claim is first examined whether P and R acquired the right to claim ownership transfer registration based on the completion of the statute of limitation for possession acquisition on each of the above lands.

(2) The issue of whether the possessor’s possession is an independent possession with the intention of possession or 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, on the basis of the title that the possessor appears to have no intention of ownership in light of the nature of the title.