1. All of the plaintiff's claims are dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. The Defendant completed the registration of ownership transfer on the ground of “acquisition of public land” on July 2, 1992, under the former District Court Decision No. 15123, Mar. 8, 1993, which was accepted on March 8, 1993, as to the land of this case, which was owned by the Plaintiff (hereinafter “instant land”).

[Ground of recognition] The entry of evidence Nos. 1 and 2 and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Assertion and determination

A. The Plaintiff’s primary cause of claim 1) The Plaintiff did not hold a consultation with the Defendant on the acquisition of the instant land. The Defendant completed the registration of ownership transfer with respect to the instant land without any title, and thus, the registration of ownership transfer under the name of the Defendant should be cancelled as the registration invalidation of the cause for invalidation. (ii) Preliminary cause of claim: The Plaintiff occupied the instant land in a peaceful and public manner by directly cultivating or leasing it by purchasing it on January 26, 1979.

The plaintiff continued to maintain possession for 20 years from March 8, 1993, when the ownership transfer registration was made in the name of the defendant, and the acquisition by prescription was completed.

Therefore, on March 8, 2013, the Defendant is obligated to implement the registration procedure for ownership transfer on the ground of the completion of the prescriptive acquisition.

B. 1) Determination 1) The title holder who has completed the registration of ownership transfer with respect to whether the registration of ownership transfer under the name of the Defendant is invalid is presumed to have acquired ownership based on legitimate grounds for registration as well as a third party. In order to deny this by the Plaintiff and to seek the cancellation of the ownership transfer registration by asserting the invalidity of the grounds for registration, the Plaintiff is liable to assert and prove the facts constituting the grounds for invalidation (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2009Da105215, Mar. 13, 2014). However, the evidence submitted by the Plaintiff alone is insufficient to recognize the fact that the grounds for registration are null and void, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge this. Accordingly, this part of the Plaintiff’