[1] The method and basis point of surveying when a boundary restoration surveying is conducted

[2] The method of surveying the boundary restoration where the base point cannot be found according to the surveying method at the time of registration

[1] Since a boundary restoration surveying conducted to restore a boundary on the cadastral map as a matter of whether a boundary is invaded, shall be conducted by the same method as the surveying conducted at the time of registration, in conducting a boundary restoration surveying, the first measurement method at the time of registration shall be followed and the second measurement method at the time of registration shall be based on the basis of the basic points at the time of registration. Although there was no accuracy due to the development of surveying method or technology at the time of registration, it is more detailed that the surveying method at the time of registration should be applied in conducting a boundary restoration surveying, and it cannot be done immediately by such method.

[2] If it was impossible to conduct a boundary restoration survey on the basis of the base point at the time of registration because it was impossible to find the base point at the time of registration for the present time, the boundary of land can be surveyed on the basis of the base point around the conditions similar to those at the time of registration.

[1] Article 25 (2) of the Cadastral Act, Article 45 of the Enforcement Decree of the Cadastral Act / [2] Article 25 (2) of the Cadastral Act, Article 45 of the Enforcement Decree of the Cadastral

[1] Supreme Court Decision 92Da47359 delivered on February 8, 1994 (Gong1994Sang, 996), Supreme Court Decision 93Da56381 delivered on May 13, 1994 (Gong1994Sang, 1675), Supreme Court Decision 94Da58490 delivered on April 21, 1995 (Gong1995Sang, 1934 delivered on August 20, 1996) / [2] Supreme Court Decision 90Da10346, 10353 delivered on June 14, 191 (Gong1991, 1914), Supreme Court Decision 90Da52961 delivered on July 23, 1991 (Gong1991, 191), Supreme Court Decision 290Da529601 delivered on July 26, 291)

No. (Attorney Park Tae-hoon, Counsel for the plaintiff-appellant)

Heak-gu (Attorney Kang Chang-ro, Counsel for defendant-appellant)

Suwon District Court Decision 92Na7136 delivered on September 4, 1996

The appeal is dismissed. The costs of appeal are assessed against the defendant.

We examine the grounds of appeal.

Since the boundary restoration surveying conducted to restore a boundary in the cadastral map as a matter of whether a boundary is invaded, should be done by the same method as the surveying conducted at the time of registration, the boundary restoration surveying should be conducted by the first surveying method as at the time of registration, and the second surveying method as at the time of registration should be based on the basis of the base point at the time of registration. Although there was no accuracy due to the development of surveying method or technology at the time of registration, there is a more detailed surveying method as at the time of registration, and it cannot be done immediately by such method (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 92Da47359, Feb. 8, 1994; 93Da56381, May 13, 1994; 93Da56381, May 13, 1994). However, if it was impossible to find the base point at the time of registration and thus, it was impossible to restore the boundary based on the base point at the time of registration based on the base point at the time of registration.

According to the records, the cadastral record of the Gyeonggi-do 115-8 to 215-8 to 115-8 to 215 square meters before becoming the site of this case was destroyed due to the disaster of June 15, 197, and the cadastral record was not restored on April 10, 1980, and the cadastral record was not restored on or around April 10, 1980, and the site of this case was combined with the site of this case on February 20, 1981. At the time of the above cadastral restoration, the boundary location of the site of this case was conducted by a plane surveying as confirmed by the current Criminal Act, based on the surrounding base point. At the time of the above cadastral restoration, the cadastral record of this case was not installed with a triangulation point or a topographic point in the surrounding site of this case, and the appraisal of the land of this case was justified by the boundary restoration method of the boundary map of this case based on the boundary line of the surrounding land of this case.

In the same purport, the decision of the court below that has employed the result of the survey appraisal of the above M&C shall be justified, and it shall not be deemed that there is an error like the theory of the lawsuit.

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed and all costs of appeal are assessed against the losing party. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.

Justices Lee Yong-hun (Presiding Justice)