Scope of Right to Graveyard:

It is reasonable to say that the real right similar to the superficies on the grave base is not limited to the place where the harm is buried, but at least to the extent that it is necessary for the maintenance of dignity of the grave, de facto management, and the excluding for example, it is included in the right.

Article 265 of the former Civil Code

[Plaintiff, Appellant] 4291 civilSang770 decided Oct. 8, 1959 (Article 279(6) of the Civil Code, Article 279(6) of the Civil Code, Article 6374 house, 7 civil 243)

Plaintiff

Defendant

The original judgment shall be modified as follows:

The Defendant, against the Plaintiff, laid away the Defendant’s worship (attached Form 2), which was laid down between the two bodies of the Plaintiff’s Cho Jong-gun’s Cho-gun (attached Form 1 and 3) in the 6-88 burial ground of Chonam-do, Jeonnam-do.

The total cost of litigation shall be borne by the defendant.

The defendant¡¯s attorney shall revoke the original judgment.

The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

The plaintiff's attorney requests a judgment that the total costs of the lawsuit shall be borne by the plaintiff, and the plaintiff's attorney requests a judgment dismissing public prosecution.

Since the actual statement of both parties is the cause of this claim by the plaintiff's legal representative, the area of the 5-year funeral for the defendant's deceased ancestor's deceased ancestor's deceased ancestor's deceased ancestor's deceased ancestor's deceased ancestor's deceased ancestor's deceased ancestor's deceased ancestor's deceased ancestor's deceased ancestor's deceased ancestor's deceased ancestor's deceased ancestor's deceased ancestor's deceased ancestor's deceased ancestor's deceased ancestor's deceased ancestor's deceased ancestor's deceased ancestor's deceased ancestor's deceased ancestor's deceased ancestor's deceased ancestor's deceased ancestor's deceased ancestor's deceased ancestor's deceased ancestor's deceased ancestor's deceased ancestor's deceased ancestor's deceased ancestor's deceased ancestor's deceased ancestor's deceased ancestor's deceased ancestor's deceased ancestor's deceased ancestor's deceased ancestor's deceased ancestor's deceased ancestor's deceased ancestor's deceased ancestor's deceased ancestor's deceased ancestor's deceased ancestor's deceased ancestor's deceased ancestor's deceased will for the plaintiff's plaintiff's deceased ancestor's deceased's deceased's deceased.

As evidence, the plaintiff's attorney submitted Gap's evidence Nos. 1 and 2, and invoked the result of the original examination by the court below and the public evidence Nos. 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 of the non-party 1, 2, 4, and 5 of the witness of the court below, and made the establishment of the evidence Nos. 4 and 5 of the court below, but the defendant's attorney stated that the evidence Nos. 1, 2-1, 3, and 5 of the evidence Nos. 1, 2-1, 3, and 5 of the court below is the site, and the defendant's attorney submitted the evidence Nos. 1, 2-2, and 3 through 5 of the court below and used the results of the original examination by the court below and the public evidence No.

In the case of the defendant's main body, the head of Jeollabuk-do, and the head of the Dong-gun, Jeollabuk-do, and the head of the Dong-gun, which had been owned by the defendant, had been openly occupied the base of the cemetery because the Lee Jong-gun (attached Form 1, 3) had been installed in the 688 cemetery for the head of the Dong-gun, Do-gun, Jeollabuk-do, and the head of the Dong-gun, which had been located in the 6nd of the 6th of the 5th of the 5th of the 5th of the 5th of the 5th of the 5th of the 5th of the 5th of the

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim for prescription that he acquired a kind of real right similar to superficies against the base of a grave in the forest owned by the defendant as a result of the completion of twenty years after the installation of the relevant ancestor cemetery. Therefore, if the existence of the plaintiff's ancestor is in accordance with the result of the verification of the court below, it is reasonable to clearly include the scope of the plaintiff's ancestor's right of public interest against the base of the grave, which is the main point of the plaintiff's ancestor's grave, and the distance between the plaintiff's ancestor's grave and the 6th and the 50th. The plaintiff's ancestor's right of public interest should not be included in the scope of the grave's infringement of the right of public interest against the plaintiff's ancestor's grave because the plaintiff's ancestor was preserved as the main point of the plaintiff's ancestor's grave was installed in the open space, and the real right similar to the superficies is not limited to the place where the harm was buried, but at least necessary for the maintenance of dignity, de facto management and removal of body within the grave base.

Even if the plaintiff acquired the cemetery by prescription as the existence of the ancestor funeral, at least 20 years prior to the expiration of the prescription period, the defendant's defense against the defendant was established. Accordingly, the defendant's defense against the non-party 6 and the non-party 7, 8, and 9 of the witness of the court below and the non-party 7, the non-party 8, and the witness of the court of the court below corresponding thereto cannot be able to know that the public interest of the non-party 8, and the non-party 9 of the non-party 1, the non-party 3, and the non-party 4 of the court below's witness 1, the non-party 1, the non-party 3, and the non-party 4 of the court below's witness 1, the non-party 15 of the court below

If so, the existence of defendant's worship, like the judgment of the court below, infringes upon the plaintiff's right to the similar property of superficies acquired by prescription, unless there exist special reasons to the extent that it was opened within the plaintiff's ancestor base, so the claim for the above mining against the defendant, who is a son of the court below, should be accepted as it is reasonable to judge the issue of the above mining, and it is reasonable to change the original judgment to the purport that it is reasonable, but it is unclear in the text, and it is so decided as per Disposition by applying Articles 96 and 89 of the Civil Procedure Act to the burden of the costs of lawsuit.

The term of office of a judge Lee Jae-soo (Presiding Judge)