1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

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

1. Basic facts

A. The title section of the closed register on F land divided in No. 1, 2, Eari-gun No. 334, which is the convergence of the instant land, is indicated as the change of the size and land category to F, F, 147 square meters, and F, 147 square meters. The title section of the closed register on F, which is divided in No. 1, 2, Eari-gun No. 334, is indicated as the change of the size and land category. The column A (owner) shall be indicated as acquiring ownership in the order of G, H, D (the date of acquisition of ownership, August 17,

The land survey division of E-ri E-ri 334 square is written as K's assessment.

B. Land Nos. 1 and 2 of the instant case are unregistered, and the “land indication” column on each land’s land’s land cadastre is divided into B 618 square meters from Woo-gun L on December 20, 1961, and the said land is divided into the instant Nos. 1 and 2 on December 6, 200, and the “owner” column is written that D residing in M was transferred the ownership on August 17, 1959.

C. On May 30, 201, the Plaintiff completed the procedure for the registration of ownership transfer on the ground of sale on May 9, 201, with respect to the 566 square meters of the Nanju-si river located adjacent to the land Nos. 1 and 2 of this case (hereinafter “the third land”).

[Identification Evidence: Each description of Evidence Nos. 1, 3, and 4 (including paper numbers) and the purport of the whole pleadings]

2. Determination on this safety defense

A. The plaintiff 1 asserts as follows.

In other words, the land No. 3 of this case was terminated by sale in the order of I, J,O, P, and the plaintiff. Around 1966, J purchased the land No. 3 of this case and commenced possession of the land No. 1, 2 of this case with the intention of possession by being delivered together with the knowledge of the land as part of the purchase, and the intention of possession was completed on December 31, 1986 past 20 years, since the acquisition by prescription was completed on December 31, 1986, the plaintiff received the registration of ownership transfer for the land No. 1, 2 of this case unregistered, based on the completion of the prescription period against D as to the land No. 1, 2 of this case, and against the defendant, it is confirmed that the