beta
Text
1. All appeals filed by the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) against the principal lawsuit and counterclaim are dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be principal lawsuit and counterclaim.
Reasons
1. The reasons for the acceptance of the judgment of the court of first instance are as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for the addition of the following '2. Additional Judgment' as to the assertion that the defendant added or emphasized to the court of first instance, and thus, they are cited as it is by the main sentence of Article 420
2. Additional determination
A. At the time the alleged defendant purchased E land from D, houses, etc. on the ground of the instant dispute were unregistered, and the defendant completed the registration of ownership transfer on November 17, 1980.
The defendant confirmed the cadastral record and the construction status at the time of the registration of transfer of ownership, and so, the above building was known at the time that it violated C's land and thus the presumption of the defendant's autonomous possession was reversed.
B. Determination 1) An occupant cannot be deemed to possess the land owned by another person with an intention to exercise exclusive control like his/her own property by excluding the ownership of another person, i.e., where the possessor does not normally take an action if the actual owner or would have taken place as a matter of course, such as where he/she did not act, etc., and where it is proved that the possessor did not have an intention to reject the ownership of another person and to occupy it, the presumption of independent possession is broken (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 98Da11758, Jun. 23, 1998). However, even if the possessor knew of the possession of another person's land adjacent to his/her own land as part of his/her own land at the beginning of possession and became aware of the possession of such land, such circumstance alone does not change the possession into another person's ownership (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2001Da5913, May 29, 2001).