1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Basic facts

가. 김해시 B 답 279평은 1912. 9. 31. C 앞으로 사정되었다가, 1916. 8. 25. 원고의 조부(祖父)인 D 앞으로 소유권 이전된 후, 1921. 12. 11. E 답 274평, F 답 5평으로 분할되었고, 위 E 답 274평은 1925. 11. 22. E 답 11평(36㎡, 이하 ‘이 사건 제1 토지’라고 한다), G 답 263평으로 분할되었으며, 이 사건 제1 토지는 같은 날 위와 같이 분할됨과 동시에 답에서 도로로 지목이 변경되었다.

B. On September 21, 1912, Kimhae-si H H 792 was circumstances in the future as of September 21, 1912. On November 22, 1925, JJ 28 square meters (932 square meters; hereinafter referred to as “the instant land 2”). The instant land was divided into the instant land 1 and the instant land 2 into 162 square meters (hereinafter referred to as “each of the instant land”). At the same time, the instant land 2 was divided as of the same day and the land category was changed from the answer to the road.

C. With respect to each of the instant lands, the registration of ownership transfer was made on August 6, 1946 for L, the father of the Plaintiff on December 7, 2004, for the reason of the inheritance of Australia on August 6, 1946, and the registration of ownership transfer was made on December 17, 2004 in the name of the Plaintiff, who is his father on December 14, 2004.

As above, each of the instant lands has been used for the passage of neighboring land owners and residents from around November 22, 1925, the land category of which has changed to a road. On November 20, 1995, the route was recognized as a local highway 1020 lines under Article 195-319 of the Gyeongnam-do Public Notice on November 20, 1995. The Defendant occupied and managed each of the instant lands from around November 20, 195 to the present day while offering them for the passage of the general public.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without a partial dispute, Gap evidence 3, Eul evidence 4-1, 2, Eul evidence 1-1 to 5, Eul evidence 2-1 to 8, Eul evidence 4 and the purport of whole pleadings

2. The plaintiff's assertion that the defendant occupied each of the lands of this case without permission and used it as a road, so the plaintiff acquired each of the lands of this case.