1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

1. The reasoning of the judgment of this court citing the judgment of the court of first instance is as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for the following parts: “Judgment of the defendant’s argument” in the judgment of the court of first instance, and thus, it shall be cited by the main sentence of Article 420 of

[Supplementary Use]

3. Judgment on the defendant's assertion

A. Since F, who leased the instant housing to the Defendant, acquired by prescription the instant land, which is the site for the instant housing, the Plaintiff cannot seek a eviction from the instant land against the Defendant.

B. 1) Whether a building has been occupied by social norms (i) whether the acquisition by prescription is completed or not, (ii) the building cannot exist regardless of its site, and thus, the land that became the site for the building shall be deemed to be possessed by the owner of the building. In this case, even if the owner of the building does not actually occupy the building or its site, it shall be deemed that the building occupies the site for the ownership of the building.

Meanwhile, even if a person who is not the nominal owner of a building actually occupies the building, he/she cannot be deemed the person who occupies the building site. However, in special circumstances, such as the acquisition by transfer of unregistered buildings and the possession of de facto disposal rights as to the building, it can be deemed that the building site also occupies.

(2) The fact that the instant house is an unauthorized building and its ownership registration has been completed in F’s name is not confirmed. (3) The fact that the instant house was registered in F’s name is not confirmed.

However, the following circumstances, including the above facts and evidence Nos. 2 and 4, revealed by the overall purport of the arguments and arguments, namely, ① From the mid-1970s, F resided in the housing of J, a spouse, and the instant case. Even after his spouse was separated from his spouse on March 1974, F was supported, brought up, and living in the same place, and ② deceased on January 1, 1989.