1. On October 14, 2014, the Defendant completed the period of prescription for acquisition of possession on real estate indicated in the attached list to the Plaintiff.

1. Determination as to the cause of claim

A. Facts of recognition 1) Real estate listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant land”)

After the transfer registration under B’s name was completed on October 2, 1922, the ownership transfer registration was completed on October 14, 1994 under the name of C on October 16, 1980. Since the death of C, the transfer registration was completed on July 8, 2011 under the name of the Defendant, the heir of C, on August 9, 2013. (2) On the other hand, as part of the second emergency water supply source expansion facility project implemented by the Joseon General Co., Ltd. around 1943, the land of this case was installed in the Namwon-si reservoir in Seoul Special Metropolitan City under the supervision of the Southern General Co., Ltd. (the administrative title at that time was referred to as “Seoul-gun,” and the land of this case was also submerged by the above reservoir up to the present day as the site of the said reservoir.

3) On January 4, 2010, the Plaintiff has been transferred the reservoir, entry building, irrigation house, pumping station, etc., which had been managed at the Namwon city including E reservoir under Article 16 of the Rearrangement of Agricultural and Fishing Villages Act from Namwon city, and continues to manage it up to the present day. [Grounds for recognition] The Plaintiff has no dispute, Gap evidence 1 through 8 (including the number of each branch number, Eul evidence 1, and evidence 2, and the purport of the whole pleadings.

B. Determination 1) Since the projects for the expansion of the second emergency water supply sources, which was conducted by the Joseon General in around 1943 by the Joseon General in order to purchase the land under its upper condition and subsidize the required expenses, if the small river site construction was conducted under the supervision of the Gun with the subsidies of the Guns as part of the above projects, it would be in accordance with the empirical and logical rules to presume that the authority that performed the installation of the small river site, purchased the land under its upper condition and paid the price thereof (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2006Da52037, Dec. 21, 2006). In light of such legal principles, the examination of the instant case is conducted as seen earlier.