beta
Text
The judgment of the court below is reversed, and the case is remanded to the Gwangju District Court Panel Division.
Reasons
The grounds of appeal are examined.
1. As to the assertion of mistake of facts as to possession, this part of the ground of appeal is erroneous as to the admission of evidence or fact-finding which belongs to the exclusive authority of the fact-finding court, and it cannot be a legitimate ground of appeal. Furthermore, even if examined in light of the record, there is no violation of the principle of free evaluation of evidence
2. As to the assertion of misapprehension of the legal principles as to administrative property, the lower court rejected the Defendant’s assertion that the land of this case is not subject to the prescriptive acquisition until the time, on the ground that the Defendant was registered as the owner on June 21, 1993 as to the land of this case. Rather, according to the fact-finding findings, it is only acknowledged that there was no permission for reclamation of public waters as to the land of this case. Thus, the lower court rejected the Defendant’s assertion that the land of this case is an administrative property as public waters until
In light of the relevant legal principles and records, the above judgment of the court below is just, and there is no error of law by misapprehending the legal principles as to administrative property or by exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence
Meanwhile, the assertion that the instant land is a forest as a natural object and not subject to acquisition by prescription until the management agency is designated as the defendant is newly asserted in the final appeal as a fact-finding court that it did not claim in the fact-finding court until April 21, 1998, and is not a legitimate ground of appeal, and even if examining the record in light of the records, there is no evidence finding that the instant land was a public property for public purposes, and thus, it cannot be accepted.
3. According to the reasoning of the lower judgment regarding the assertion of misapprehension of the legal doctrine as to the possession with autonomy, the lower court set one-five parts of the forest land located in the Yannam-gun, Jeonnam-gun, Seoul, adjacent to the instant land on December 18, 1918.