beta
Text
1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.
Purport of claim and appeal
purport.
Reasons
1. The court has stated this part of the facts of recognition.
1) Inasmuch as the pertinent part of the judgment of the first instance is the same as the reasoning for the judgment with the exception of height as indicated below, it shall be cited as it is in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act. “B.1 each of the lands listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter referred to as “paragraph 1”) is specified as “land” according to the number thereof, and if each of the lands listed in the separate sheet is referred to as “each of the instant lands” in the separate sheet is referred to as “each of the instant lands” in the said circumstances (hereinafter referred to as “each of the instant lands”). The following is divided from each of the said lands (hereinafter referred to as “each of the instant lands”). On June 16, 1978, 1978, 0.08 square meters of land of 354 square meters in G, 354 square meters in G, 1964 square meters in size on Oct. 4, 2004 (793 square meters in size).
2. Determination
A. The pertinent legal doctrine as to the cause of the claim is based on the original acquisition of the pertinent land by the title holder of the land under the former Land Survey Decree (Ordinance No. 2, Aug. 13, 1912) (see, e.g., Supreme Court en banc Decision 84Meu1773, Jun. 10, 1986). If at least the land survey division was prepared and circumstances were under the former Land Survey Ordinance, the title holder or his/her heir becomes the land owner.
In addition, if it is found that there is a separate person in charge of the assessment of ownership preservation on the land, the actual effect of registration of ownership preservation on the land shall be broken and the registration shall be null and void unless the registered titleholder claims and proves the acquisition by succession specifically.
(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2001Da4705, Jun. 24, 2003). Each of the lands listed in the separate sheet is the F, the husband of the Plaintiff, who is the 1/3 share of the 1/3 of the land indicated in the separate sheet.