1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Basic facts

A. The land survey division concerning the 1,364 square meters (hereinafter “land before subdivision”) prepared during the Japanese occupation point period is indicated as E having the address in D.

B. The land before subdivision was divided into the F 77 square meters before F in 1943, G 122 square meters before G (after that, the administrative district was changed, the size was converted, and the land category was changed; hereinafter “instant land”). The land before subdivision was divided into four hundred and sixty five square meters before H.

C. On January 29, 1943 with respect to the above F land and H land, registration of preservation of ownership has been made in the name of I, but the land in this case is currently unregistered.

The permanent domicile of the Plaintiff, E (E, Death on October 22, 1912), the son J (J, death on February 15, 1942) and the son K (K and creative name is I) is the Man-gun L.

K died on August 1, 1986 and jointly inherited wife M, N,O, and the plaintiff.

M deceased on April 2, 2007, M jointly succeeded to N,O, and the plaintiff who is a child.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, Gap evidence 2-1, Gap evidence 2-2, Gap evidence 3, Gap evidence 4-1, 2, Gap evidence 5, Gap evidence 6-1, 2, and Gap evidence 7, the purport of the whole pleadings and arguments

2. The assertion and judgment

A. 1) The Plaintiff asserts that the Plaintiff has ownership equivalent to 4/10 of the instant land out of the Plaintiff, as he was subject to the assessment of the land before subdivision and succeeded to it in succession. 2) The Defendant asserts that, in around 1943, K (I) completed registration of preservation of ownership of F land and H land divided from the land before subdivision in its name, it cannot be readily concluded that the Plaintiff is the owner of 4/10 of the instant land, and that the Defendant occupied the land in good faith and without negligence for not less than 20 years, and thus, the acquisition by prescription was completed.

B. According to Article 197(1) of the Civil Act, it is presumed that the possessor has occupied the ship in a peaceful manner with his/her own will, and that such act is carried out.