1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

Purport of claim and appeal

1...

1. The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance cited in the judgment of the court of first instance is as follows: ① Section 6’s “paragraph 4 of Chapter 2” in the judgment of the court of first instance; ② Section 8’s “Paragraph 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5” in the same judgment of the court of first instance is as “paragraphs 1, 2, 3, and 6”; and the Defendant’s assertion emphasized or added by this court is as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for addition of the judgment under the following Paragraph 2, and thus, it is acceptable in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420

2. Judgment on the defendant's additional assertion

A. The summary of the assertion 1) Land E in substantial Cheongju-si, the neighboring land of each of the instant lands (the instant orchard part)

(2) Since the Plaintiff’s ownership was originally owned by Nonparty C, a Japanese, and thereafter ought to be reverted to the State. However, the Plaintiff’s former owner completed the registration of ownership transfer for the above land, which is a state-owned land, in succession, with the invalidation of the cause. The Plaintiff completed the registration of ownership transfer for the above land, based on the registration that was null and void as above. If there are such circumstances, the Plaintiff is presumed to be an occupant in bad faith who acquired possession with knowledge that the above land and each adjacent land were state-owned property. (2) Furthermore, it is reasonable to deem that the Cheongju City Urban Development Project was planned regarding each land of this case and the compensation for the expropriation of each land will belong to the State, and thus, the Plaintiff’s possession of each land of this case was lost

Therefore, the plaintiff's assertion of prescription for the acquisition of possession, which is premised on the continuation or existence of possession, is without merit.

B. 1) As to the assertion that it is presumed to be an occupant in bad faith, if the purchaser of the land acquired possession of the land for the purpose by a sales contract, it constitutes the sale of another person’s land, and even if it is not immediately acquired ownership, the purchaser is owned by the nature of the possessor’s source of possession.