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 July 3, 1981, the Defendant completed registration of preservation of ownership (hereinafter “registration of preservation of ownership under the Act on Special Measures for the Protection of Ownership”) pursuant to the former Act on Special Measures for the Registration, etc. of Ownership of Real Estate (amended by Act No. 3159, Dec. 6, 1978; hereinafter “Special Measures Act”) with respect to the land of this case, which is 3,117 square meters at the window of Chang-si, Chang-si (hereinafter “the instant land before division”).

B. On March 30, 1995, the instant land prior to the subdivision was divided into: (a) 2,431 square meters prior to the Changwon-si’s window C; (b) 527 square meters prior to D; and (c) 159 square meters prior to E; and (b) the said land was incorporated into the said land into the C,590 square meters prior to the Changwon-si’s counter (hereinafter “instant land”) on April 8, 201.

C. From July 1, 1980 to the date, the Plaintiff occupied the part (A) of the instant case by planting trees to the 455mm2 in the ship (hereinafter “the part (a) of the instant case”) connected in sequence with each point of 1, 2, 1, 1, 2, 1, 2, 2, 2, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, and 1, among the instant land.

[Ground of recognition] The fact that there is no dispute, Gap evidence 1-1, 2, Eul evidence 1-1, 1-2, and the result of the measurement and appraisal commissioned to the deputy governor of the first instance court to the Changwon-dong Vice governor of the Korea Land Information Corporation, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether prescriptive acquisition is completed;

A. According to the above facts, from July 1, 1980, the Plaintiff continuously occupied the part of the instant case (A) for not less than 20 years, and such possession is presumed to have been carried out in peace and public performance according to the intent of ownership pursuant to Article 197(1) of the Civil Act.

B. Determination as to the Defendant’s defense of the occupancy of a third party ought not to be determined by the prior deliberation of the possessor, but to be determined externally and objectively by the nature of the title, which caused the acquisition of the possession, or by all circumstances related to the possession, rather than by the occupant’s intention.

Therefore, the possessor is owned by its nature.