1. On February 1, 1996, the Defendant (Counterclaim Defendant) against the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) regarding the real estate stated in the separate sheet.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The registration of ownership transfer was completed in the name of D on February 24, 1954 with respect to the land size of 641 square meters in the Gyeong-si, Chungcheongnam-si, Chungcheongnam-do, and on November 5, 1974, the registration of ownership transfer was completed in the name of the defendant on April 11, 2019 due to the inheritance of property due to the consultation division as of November 5, 1974.

B. On February 1, 1976, the Plaintiff newly constructed a house stated in the purport of the counterclaim on the ground of the real estate portion listed in the attached list (hereinafter “instant land”) and uses it until now.

[Evidence Evidence] Uncontentious Facts, Gap 1-13, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Main elements;

(a) The possessor of a determination on the cause of the claim shall be presumed to have occupied in good faith, peace, and public performance with his own intent;

(Article 197(1) of the Civil Act. It is presumed that the Plaintiff’s land possession in this case is peaceful and openly occupied by his/her own will.

B. As to the Defendant’s argument, the Defendant asserts that the presumption of possession with autonomy is reversed, since the Plaintiff occupied the instant land knowing that there was no legal act or any other legal requirements which could cause the Plaintiff to acquire ownership at the time.

It is not determined according to the intention of the possessor with the intention of the possessor, whether the possessor is the possession with intention or not, but the possession should be determined externally and objectively according to the nature of the source of title which is the cause of the acquisition of possession or all circumstances related to the possession.

An occupant is proved to have acquired possession on the basis of the title that appears to have no intention to own in its nature, or an objective circumstance that cannot be deemed that the possessor occupies possession on the basis of his/her own intent to exclusively control as his/her own property by excluding the ownership of another person, i.e., where the possessor does not normally have taken if the actual owner, or where the possessor does not act to have taken place as a matter of course if he/she did not act, etc., he/she shall be deemed to have rejected the ownership of another person