beta
Text
1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.
Purport of claim and appeal
1...
Reasons
1. The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance cited the same reasoning as that of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for the addition and modification as follows, and thus, it is consistent with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.
In the judgment of the court of first instance, 2 to 4 acts as follows, where the changed state or local government takes procedures for acquiring public property prescribed by the Local Finance Act, such as one’s own shares or donation, or incorporates private land into the reservoir site without a certain title to possess the land, such as obtaining the consent of its owners, etc., and where it is proved that the state or local government occupied the land without permission knowing that it does not meet the legal requirements for acquiring ownership, such as where the state or local government was aware of the fact that it does not meet the requirements
(See Supreme Court Decision 2000Da64472 Decided March 27, 2001, etc.). However, the State or a local government fails to submit documents regarding the procedure for acquiring land for which the completion of prescriptive acquisition is claimed.
Even if the cadastral record, etc. on the relevant land was lost in the column of 6.25 or no other reason exists, it cannot be readily concluded that the State or a local government occupied the relevant land with the knowledge that there was another person registered as the owner in the cadastral record, etc. In light of the developments and purpose of the occupation, if it appears that the possibility that the State or a local government lawfully acquired the ownership by undergoing the procedure for acquiring public property at the time of the commencement of occupation cannot be ruled out, it is difficult to deem that the State or a local government proves that it occupied the land without permission with the knowledge of such circumstance without the legal requirements for acquiring the ownership (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 208Da92268, Oct. 14, 2010). However, the cadastral record, etc. at the time the State or a local government begins the occupation