1. Revocation of a judgment of the first instance;

2. The Defendants are listed in the separate sheet in the Nam-gu E field of 58 E at the time of port to the Plaintiff.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On July 3, 1964, the net F acquired the ownership of the Nam-gu I reply 287 square meters (hereinafter “land before division”).

B. On November 12, 1964, the Plaintiff divided the land category of the instant land into 58 E-Gu, Nam-gu, Nam-gu (hereinafter “instant land”) and J-gu 4 square meters from the land before it was divided into a road, and provided that the land category of the instant land was changed to a road and provided it to the general public for traffic, thereby occupying and using the instant land as a road until now from that time.

C. The deceased on August 31, 1974, and the Defendants, their co-inheritors, as co-inheritors, completed the registration of ownership transfer on August 31, 1974 with respect to each share in the separate sheet among the instant land on December 10, 1974.

【In the absence of dispute over the grounds for recognition, entry of Gap evidence 1, 2-1 to 3, 3, 4-1 to 3, 5-1 to 8, 9-1, 2, 10-1 to 6, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. According to the above findings of the determination as to the cause of the claim, the Plaintiff occupied the instant land in a peaceful and public manner with its own intent from November 12, 1964, which began to occupy and change the land category of the instant land into a road, and thus, the prescriptive acquisition on November 12, 1984, which was 20 years thereafter, was completed.

Therefore, the Defendants are obligated to implement the registration procedure for ownership transfer on November 12, 1984 with respect to each share listed in the separate sheet among the instant land to the Plaintiff.

3. Claims and determination by the Defendants

A. Since the Plaintiff did not submit all documents on the procedure for acquiring the land of this case, the Plaintiff’s possession of the land of this case constitutes an unauthorized possession.

Therefore, the presumption of autonomous possession was broken.

B. If the nature of possessory right of one real estate is not clear, the possessor shall have possession in good faith, peace and public performance in accordance with Article 197(1) of the Civil Act.