1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. The plaintiff's assertion

A. On April 29, 197, the Plaintiff purchased a 258m2 and D large 202m2m2 and completed the registration of ownership transfer.

B. The land owned by the Defendant, a neighboring land, is installed with a high fence, and part of the instant land is located outside of the fence, and is adjacent to the said land owned by the said Plaintiff.

C. The plaintiff occupied the land of this case from the time of purchase of each of the above land and 20 years have passed since the acquisition by possession of the land of this case was completed.

2. Since a person who intends to purchase an ordinary real estate enters into a sales contract after confirming the ownership relationship and size by a certified copy of the register or cadastral record before entering into the sales contract, it is reasonable to deem that the contracting party knew of such fact if the area of the land subject to sale exceeds considerably the area entered in the public record. In such a case, barring special circumstances such as the seller’s acquisition of ownership to the excessive portion and the agreement to transfer ownership to a third party, the excess portion shall be deemed a sale of the right of occupancy and

(Supreme Court Decision 2003Da61054 Decided 14, 2004). With respect to the instant case, the sum of the area of the land in two parcels purchased by the Plaintiff is 460 square meters (258 square meters) and the area of the instant land is 147 square meters adjacent to 1/3 thereof, so the form of the land is equal to the area of 147 square meters, although the form of the land is adjacent to the boundary of the land.

However, since the difference between the area of the land purchased by the plaintiff is too large, the occupation of the land of this case can not be interpreted as the possession of the owner.

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim is without merit.