1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Basic Facts

A. On April 7, 196 with respect to the portion of 6198 square meters in Jeju-si (hereinafter “instant land”), the registration of ownership transfer was completed on April 7, 1976 with respect to the share of Defendant B, C and F, G, H, I, J, and K for inheritance. As to the share of G 1/8, the registration of ownership transfer was completed on March 5, 2008 to the non-party L and three persons on March 5, 2008. As to the share of J, H, I, I, and K, the registration of ownership transfer was completed on October 29, 2015 with respect to the share of F due to inheritance by consultation or division with Defendant B, and on October 29, 2015, the registration of ownership transfer was completed on October 29, 2015 with respect to the share of F.

B. The instant land is divided into a 3216 square meters inside the ship with the indication of the drawings, such as (A) part of 2982 square meters in the ship with the indication of the attached drawing (hereinafter “the instant area”). However, the deceased M (Death on January 24, 1982; hereinafter “the deceased”) has cultivated and occupied the instant area in the instant area since 40 years ago, and is currently cultivated by the Plaintiff, who is a shot of the deceased.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 2, and Eul evidence Nos. 2, and the result of the on-site inspection by this court, the plaintiff asserted the purport of the whole argument, as a result of the plaintiff's donation from the deceased to the deceased, occupied the part of the dispute of this case before the deceased's death for at least 20 years, and the time of voluntary possession is no change in the name of the owner of the land of this case. The plaintiff's acquisition by prescription for the part of the dispute of this case was completed on August 1, 2015.

Therefore, the Defendants are obligated to implement the registration procedure for transfer of ownership on August 1, 2015 with respect to the dispute part of this case to the Plaintiff.

Judgment

First, we examine whether the plaintiff occupied the dispute part of this case as the intention of ownership.

According to Article 197 (1) of the Civil Act, the possessor of an article is presumed to have possessed it as his/her own intention.