1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

2. The acquisition by prescription on October 20, 199, which the Plaintiff had selectedly added in this court.

1. Basic facts

A. On October 18, 1971, the Defendant’s network D purchased from E the KRW 41,000 of the purchase price of KRW 41,00,00 for the first five-half of the first five-party forest land in the Jeonnam-gun (hereinafter “instant land before the instant subdivision”). The ownership transfer registration was completed in the Defendant’s name on May 16, 1973 according to the interim omission registration agreement.

B. The instant land before the instant partition was divided into ① 10,017 square meters of forest land in the Gu-gun, Jeonnam-gun, ② 487 square meters of forest land in the above H, ③ 1,063 square meters of forest land in the above I, and ④ the above C, 3,905 square meters of forest in the above C (hereinafter “instant land”). The instant land was divided into the said C, 1,483 square meters of forest land and the said L, 2,422 square meters of forest in the instant lawsuit on May 17, 2017.

C. On the instant land, K, the Plaintiff’s father, included the Plaintiff’s early October 3, 1979’s early funeral graves installed around October 3, 1979, and six seedlings established by the Plaintiff, and part of the instant land is green trees planted by N, the Plaintiff’s private village.

[Ground of recognition] The facts without any dispute, Gap's 1 through 3, 9, Eul's 1 through 5, 8, 9, 12 through 14, 22, and the purport of the whole pleadings and arguments

2. Judgment as to the main claim

A. On May 26, 1975, K, the plaintiff's assertion, purchased the land of this case from D, the defendant's referenced to the plaintiff, and since the plaintiff inherited it from the Dong K, the defendant is obligated to implement the procedure for the transfer registration of ownership due to sale on May 26, 1975.

B. The entry of No. 6, which seems consistent with the argument that K purchased the land of this case from D, is not only the plaintiff's dead village, but also the person who shares the same interest with the plaintiff as the actual farmer of part of the land of this case, and considering that the originator is not a person directly engaged in or witnessing in the process of purchasing the land of this case, it is difficult to believe it as it is. The entry of No. 7, 8, and 13 (including the serial number) is also difficult.