1. Revocation of the first instance judgment.

2. The Defendant indicated in the attached Form 1 through 15, among the land size of 2,360 square meters in smuggling to the Plaintiff.

1. Basic facts

A. The 2,360 square meters of the instant land (hereinafter “instant land”) was owned by D, and the registration of ownership transfer was completed under the Defendant’s name on August 31, 1981 due to the donation from October 5, 1974.

B. Although the land category of the instant land was “responding”, the land category was changed to “maintenance” on August 30, 1958.

C. Of the instant land, part (A) of 980 square meters in the ship (hereinafter “instant land”) which connects each point of the attached drawing Nos. 1 through 15, 39 through 45, and 1 among the instant land is currently being used as a whole, and part (B) of 1,380 square meters in the ship (hereinafter “instant reservoir”) which connects each point of 15 through 39, and 15 of the same drawing Nos. 15 to 39, and 15 are used as a previous reservoir, but does not play a role as a reservoir.

The father of the plaintiff E died on September 2, 1998.

E. On March 24, 2018, E’s inheritors made an agreement on the division of inherited property with the Plaintiff’s sole ownership of the land in the instant dispute.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 8 through 13 (including provisional number; hereinafter the same shall apply), Gap evidence No. 17, the video, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. The Plaintiff’s primary assertion No. 1) The father E purchased the land in the instant dispute from D in around 1970 and managed rice shed. After the death of E, the Plaintiff succeeded to the possession of the land in the instant dispute through an inheritance division consultation among co-inheritors, and is in possession of the land so far or in the process of planting and managing it. Therefore, on September 1, 2001, when the Defendant acquired the ownership of the instant land from August 31, 1981, when 200 years have passed since the acquisition by prescription, the Plaintiff completed the acquisition by possession of the instant land in the instant dispute. As such, the Defendant is obligated to implement the registration procedure for ownership transfer on September 1, 2001 with respect to the instant land in the instant dispute to the Plaintiff.2) The father of the Plaintiff’s assertion E.