1. The defendant is on the ground of the prescriptive acquisition on December 10, 2004 with respect to the land size of 400 square meters in Pakistan-si, Gyeonggi-do.

The plaintiff's assertion and judgment party's assertion that the plaintiff himself has a duty to implement the procedure for ownership transfer registration on December 10, 2004 as to the land of this case, since he occupied the land of this case, C, C, 400 square meters (hereinafter "the land of this case") in his own intention for twenty (20) years from December 10, 1984 and completed the prescriptive acquisition on December 10, 2004, the defendant asserts that he is obligated to implement the procedure for ownership transfer registration on the ground of the completion of prescriptive acquisition on December 10, 2004. The defendant holds a registration right to the land of this case and paid the property tax on the land of this case, so it cannot be deemed that the plaintiff has occupied the land of this case as his intention to own it, and therefore there is no ground for the plaintiff'

Judgment

From December 10, 1984, there is no dispute between the parties as to the fact that the Plaintiff has occupied the land of this case in a peaceful and public manner.

Therefore, the issues of the instant case are whether the Plaintiff occupied the instant land with the intention to own it.

Therefore, this paper examines this.

In the relevant legal principle of prescriptive acquisition, the existence or absence of an intention of possession, which is the requirement for possession with intention to hold shall be determined objectively by the nature of the source of possessor’s right which is the cause of the acquisition. However, if the nature of the source of possessor’s right is not clear, the possessor is presumed to have occupied as the intention to hold pursuant to Article 197(1) of the Civil Act. Therefore, the possessor does not have the responsibility to prove that he/she is the possession with intention to own, and the possessor bears the burden of proof for

Even if the possessor asserts the right of possession such as purchase and sale or donation, but this is not recognized, the possessor has the burden of proving the original right of possession.