1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

1. Basic facts

A. The plaintiff is A's son, and the defendant is the H's son who is a deadly related son of A.

B. From October 16, 1963, A owns the area of 843 square meters and 357 square meters for E, Seosan-si, Seosan-si. The Plaintiff owned one-six shares of G forest land of 12298 square meters (hereinafter “instant forest”) on December 31, 1996 by donation from A, his father, who is his father.

C. A was a director in Seoul in the 1960s and was entrusted with the management of each of the above lands to mar I.

I around that time set up a warehouse on the ship, which connects each point of 1 to 4, and 1 in the attached Form No. 1 to 4, among the above F 357 square meters, to the 41 square meters in order to connect each point of 41 square meters in each of 5 to 8, and 5 in the attached Form No. 1 to 7 square meters in the ship.

Since then, H resided in the above house with wife C and the defendant with the I's permission.

As H died around August 1975, C installed the instant grave in the area of “A” (hereinafter referred to as “A”) located in the area of “A” (hereinafter referred to as “A”) connected in order to each point of the instant forests and fields indicated 1 to 5, and 1, among the instant forests and fields adjacent to the said housing.

Since then, C and the Defendant, while managing the instant grave, occupy the land of “A” portion of the instant forest land as the base for the grave.

[Ground of recognition] The fact that there is no dispute, entry and video of Gap 1 through 7, and 9 (including paper numbers), the result of the commission of surveying and appraisal to the Korea Land Information Corporation by the court of first instance, the part of testimony and whole purport of pleading by the witness of the court of first instance, and the purport of whole pleadings

2. The fact that the Plaintiff owned 1/6 shares in the instant forest, the Defendant was the son of H, and the death of H around August 1975, and that C installed the instant grave on the part “1” (hereinafter referred to as “A”) of the instant forest, which connected in sequence 1 through 5 and 1, in the order of the [Attachment] 1 through 5 and 1, among the instant forest land, and was recognized as above. As such, the Defendant was the manager and manager of the instant grave, who was the captain of the instant forest against H, and thus, was in the possession of the instant grave.