1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

1. 제1심판결의 인용 이 법원의 판결이유는, 당심에서 추가 제출된 증거로서 피고의 주장사실을 인정하기에 부족한 을 제8 내지 11호증의 각 기재를 배척하고, 제1심판결 이유 ‘제1의 나 2)’ 부분을 아래와 같이 고치며, 당심에서 피고의 새로운 주장에 대하여 아래와 같은 판단을 추가하는 외에는 제1심판결 이유와 같으므로, 민사소송법 제420조 본문에 의하여 이를 그대로 인용한다. 2. 고치는 부분 분할 전 B에 관하여 1932. 11. 18. 소유자를 ‘경상남도지방비’로 하는 소유권보존등기가 마쳐진 후, 같은 날 D 명의로 소유권이전등기가 마쳐졌다가, 1933. 12. 20. 일본 동경시에 주소지를 둔 서협합명회사(西脇合名會社 명의로 소유권이전등기가 마쳐졌고, 피고는 1962. 8. 17. ‘1948. 9. 11. 권리귀속’을 원인으로 한 소유권이전등기를 마쳤다.

3. Additional determination

A. Defendant’s assertion 1) The forest land of this case was registered due to the sale under the name of the Seocho-gu Partnership with a domicile in the east of Japan on December 20, 193, and the ownership transfer registration was completed for the Defendant on September 11, 1948 after the passage of the Republic of Korea. In other words, the forest land of this case was transferred to the State by reversion of rights, and the Defendant did not acquire ownership in relation to the construction of farmland improvement facilities. Therefore, the forest land of this case does not fall under the condition that “the ownership of the land for farmland improvement facilities belongs to the State with respect to the construction of farmland improvement facilities.” Thus, even if the forest of this case was reverted to the State with respect to the installation of farmland improvement facilities, the ownership of the forest of this case cannot be comprehensively transferred pursuant to the above Act, and even if the forest of this case was reverted to the State, the forest land of this case is 3,557 square meters out of the forest of this case for the following reasons.