beta
Text
1. All of the plaintiffs' claims are dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiffs.
Reasons
1. The presumption of registration of ownership preservation on the land to be determined as to the cause of the claim shall be broken if it is proved that there is another person in charge of the assessment of the land, and the registration shall be invalidated unless the registered titleholder proves the acquisition by succession (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2002Da43417, May 26, 2005). According to each of subparagraphs A and 4 (including the serial number), according to each of the records, the land survey book prepared during the Japanese occupation occupation period is entered as the land survey book in the plaintiffs' lighting as the title holder of the assessment of each of the land of this case, and the defendant may recognize the completion of registration of ownership preservation on the above land on February 3, 1978.
Therefore, as the deceased, who is a de facto titleholder, acquired each of the lands of this case, the defendant is obligated to implement the registration procedure for transfer of ownership based on the restoration of real name as to each of the above lands to the plaintiffs, the inheritor of the deceased, unless there are special circumstances.
2. Determination on the defendant's defenses by prescription
A. Article 197(1) of the Civil Act provides that “A possessor shall be presumed to have occupied the possessor in good faith, peace, and public performance.” As such, the possessor is not liable for proving that he/she himself/herself is the possessor in accordance with the nature of the possessor’s possession, and the possessor bears the burden of proving the possessor’s possession of the other party who asserts that he/she is the possessor is the possessor of the other party who has no intention to own. As such, even in cases where the possessor asserts the title of the possession, such as purchase and sale or donation, but this is not acknowledged, the presumption of the possession with the sole reason that the possessor is not recognized as the possessor, unless the possessor bears the burden of proving the source of the right
(See Supreme Court Decision 96Da29410 delivered on November 8, 1996). B.
As seen below, the defendant shall not be less than 20 years from the end of the 1950s.