1. The defendant (Counterclaim plaintiff)'s appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal are assessed against the Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) in total.

1. The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance is as follows: "A witness of the court of first instance" of first instance No. 3; "this court" shall be deemed to be "the first instance court"; "the fourth part shall be deemed to be "the first instance court"; and even according to the defendant's assertion that the deceased voluntarily completed the registration of ownership transfer of each of the lands before the division of the case against the plaintiff without the defendant's consent, it is reasonable to deem that the condition was met that the deceased's failure to perform the obligation to transfer ownership to the defendant at the latest at the time of the registration of ownership transfer against the plaintiff; and it is difficult to deem that the period of extinctive prescription is calculated from the time when the plaintiff received the compensation for its expropriation, as the defendant's assertion, at the latest, from the time of the above registration of ownership transfer to the plaintiff, the condition that the deceased's failure to perform the obligation to transfer ownership to the defendant is the 12 square meters and K 1533 square meters in size as of May 17, 2016 or from the plaintiff received the compensation for expropriation.

2. In conclusion, the judgment of the first instance is legitimate, and the defendant's appeal is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition.