1. The Defendant completed the acquisition by prescription on January 1, 1987 with respect to one-half portion of the total area of 4,089 square meters in Gangwon-gun, Gangwon-gun, Gangwon-do.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. D is the father of the Plaintiff, E is the wife of D and the other side of the Plaintiff, and F is the wife of E and the other side of the Plaintiff. G is the mother of the Defendant and F, and F is the Defendant’s words.

B. Around 1962, Defendant and F owned 1/2 shares of each of the land indicated in the order (hereinafter “instant land”). D purchased the instant land in the name of Plaintiff from F and the Defendant’s legal representative at the time of 14 years of age, around 1962.

C. Around that time, D began cultivating the entire land of this case from Defendant and F with delivery. Since 1966, D had been transferred by the Plaintiff and cultivated it up to the present day.

On the other hand, on January 23, 1963, Defendant and F completed registration of initial ownership relating to one-half of each of the instant land.

【Ground for Recognition: Facts without dispute, each entry of Gap evidence from Gap 1 to 11 (including additional numbers), witness H and I's testimony, the purport of the whole pleadings】

2. Determination

A. If the registrant continues to be the same during the period of judgment on the cause of claim, it is sufficient to determine where the period has elapsed since the commencement of the acquisition by deeming the starting point as at the time from which the former possessor is entitled to assert the completion of the acquisition by taking the starting point between where the starting point is located. Therefore, even in a case where the 20-year period has elapsed by succession to the possession of the former possessor and adding up the period to his own possession, the former possessor may claim the completion of the acquisition by taking the starting point at his discretion after the commencement of possession as at the starting point, and the same shall also apply to a case where the registration titleholder is the same as at the end of the expiration of the acquisition period by counting

(Supreme Court Decision 97Da34037 delivered on May 12, 1998, etc.). In this case, according to the above facts of recognition, the plaintiff occupied the land of this case since January 1, 1967, which the plaintiff deemed as the starting point of calculation.