1. The plaintiff's appeal against the defendants is dismissed in entirety.

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

purport, purport, and.

1. The following facts are not disputed between the parties, or can be acknowledged in full view of the purport of the entire pleadings as to the entries in Gap evidence Nos. 2-1 to 6.

Attached Form

Of each land listed in paragraphs (3), (5), and (6) and each land listed in paragraphs (1), (b), and (4) of the attached list, the above part among the land listed in paragraphs (a), (b), and (4) of the attached list is the site of the area of the Category D small marsh located in He of Ulsan-gu, U.S.

(hereinafter referred to as the “instant site”) b.

On March 21, 1984, as to each of the lands listed in the Schedule Nos. 1, 2, and 3 of the annexed Table Nos. 1, 2, and 1984, the defendant Cial Association shall register the transfer of ownership on the grounds of sale on July 7, 1974. The defendant Bial Association registered the transfer of ownership on the grounds of sale on June 25, 1992 as to each of the lands listed in the Schedule Nos. 4, 5, and 6 of the annexed Table No. 4, 1992.

2. The Plaintiff asserts that the prescriptive prescription has been completed at the lapse of 20 years from the time when the Defendants acquired ownership of the site of this case since the Plaintiff established the instant site in around 1920 by managing the instant site in a peaceful and openly occupying the instant site since it established the instant site. As such, the Defendants are liable to implement the procedure for the registration of ownership transfer based on the completion of prescriptive prescription against the instant site to the Plaintiff.

According to the records of evidence Nos. 1 and 6, it is recognized that the Ulsan Farmland Improvement Association, a telegraphic body of the plaintiff, registered the farmland improvement facility of the E reservoir in Ulsan-gu I around 1980 and recorded the Category D location in the special port of the registry.

(1) However, the Plaintiff asserts that J has been appointed as a custodian and has managed the D basin. However, according to the evidence No. 8, the management facility of the J commissioned as a seasonal worker in 2008 shall be “reservoir, F and other facilities” and the above statement alone shall be deemed to be a “reser, F and other facilities.”