1. The defendant is based on the completion of the prescriptive acquisition on August 26, 2006, with respect to the land size of 116 square meters in the city of macro-do to the plaintiff.

1. The facts following the facts of recognition do not conflict between the parties, or can be acknowledged by taking into account the following facts: Gap evidence Nos. 1 to 8, Eul evidence Nos. 3, 5 to 10 (including a Serial number); witness D, E, and F testimony; appraiser G appraisal results; the result of the on-site verification by this court; the results of each fact inquiry into the market at this court; and the whole purport of the pleadings.

On January 19, 1981, the Defendant completed the registration of ownership transfer in its name with respect to H 312 square meters (hereinafter referred to as “land before subdivision”).

B. On May 30, 1997, the land before subdivision was divided into H large 196 square meters and C large 116 square meters (hereinafter “instant land”).

C. On June 22, 1981, I, as his father J-owned on June 22, 1981, completed the registration of transfer of ownership in its name with respect to the land of 149 square meters (hereinafter “K”) prior to K, which is adjacent to the land prior to the division.

Although L, the husband of the Plaintiff, indicated “part within H (B)” as the sales contract for the part of the land of this case among the land before K and the land before subdivision from I on August 26, 1986, according to the above evidence, among the land before subdivision, the part of the land of this case was already used as the site, ma, and access road at the time of the sale and purchase of the said land, and the part of the land before subdivision was divided into the fence of the said house and the fence of the said house at the time of the sale and purchase, and there was a difference in height as well as the difference in height. Accordingly, according to the above facts of recognition, it is reasonable to view that the said part of the land under the sales and purchase contract is the same as the part of the land of this case before subdivision.

In addition, the above ground house was purchased in KRW 1.8 million and occupied it. At the time, K land and the land of this case were used as the site, math, and access road of the above house.

(e) thereafter died on September 12, 198;