1. The defendant is based on the completion of the prescriptive acquisition on January 27, 2007 with respect to the land size of 293 square meters in Seosan-si, Seosan-si.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On December 18, 1971, D, the Plaintiff’s mother, completed the registration of ownership transfer with respect to forest E 10,314 square meters (hereinafter “forest E before subdivision”), and installed a net F and Dog G graves, the spouse of which is the forest before subdivision.

After that, D sold the forest land before the division to H on June 9, 1975.

B. On June 13, 1975, H: (a) completed the registration of ownership transfer of forest land before subdivision; (b) discovered a net G grave at will; (c) on April 197, H agreed to transfer the Plaintiff’s 60th of the site of the grave site among forest land before subdivision.

C. On January 15, 1987, H completed the registration of ownership transfer on the ground of sale on January 14, 1987 with regard to forest land before subdivision to the network I.

On January 27, 1987, the network I divided the 293 square meters of forest C in Seosan-si, Seosan-si (hereinafter “instant forest”).

At present, on the land of the instant forest, the Plaintiff’s gymnasium F is installed.

The heir of the network I reported the renunciation of inheritance to the Suwon District Court on October 8, 2012, there are J and K, the spouse of the defendant, the child, and J and K, and K reported the renunciation of inheritance to the Suwon District Court.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 7, purport of the whole pleadings

2. According to the facts acknowledged prior to the determination, the Plaintiff can recognize the fact that he occupied the forest of this case from April 197 to the date of the closing of argument in this case. The said possession is presumed to have occupied the forest of this case in a peaceful manner with the intention of possession.

On the other hand, the instant forest land does not change the owner after the net I acquired the ownership on January 15, 1987. As such, the Plaintiff’s prescriptive acquisition as to the instant forest was completed after the lapse of 20 years from January 17, 1987, which was the initial date of acquisition by prescription claimed by the Plaintiff.

Therefore, the Defendant is obligated to implement the registration procedure for transfer of ownership on January 17, 2007 with respect to the forest of this case to the Plaintiff.

3. The plaintiff's claim is justified.