beta
Text
1. Defendant B’s acquisition by prescription on January 1, 2012 with respect to each real estate listed in the separate sheet by the Plaintiff.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. The former land cadastre of each of the real estates listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “each of the instant real estates”) indicated as the assessment of each of the instant real estates on November 3, 1912 by Defendant B (the Chinese name: B, address: C). However, each of the instant real estates is unregistered.
B. On February 28, 2018, the Plaintiff asked on November 3, 1912, the head of Sung-gun, Sung-gun, Sung-gun, to issue a certified copy and a certified copy of the resident registration and a certified copy of the register on the relevant human property if there is a person who used the name B in the name of "Seoul-gun, E," and the head of Sung-gun, Sung-gun, Sung-gun, asked him/her not to issue a certified copy and a certified copy on March 26, 2018.
[Ground of recognition] The fact that there is no dispute, Gap evidence 1, 2 (including each number), Eul evidence 1 and 2, the fact-finding and re-examination of the sexual group D pages of this court, the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Determination as to Defendant B
A. Each of the instant real estate indicated in the claim is owned by Defendant B, and the Plaintiff has occupied each of the instant real estate in peace and openly with intent to own it for at least 20 years from January 1, 1992 to the present 20 years. As such, the period of prescription for acquisition of possession of each of the instant real estate was completed on or around January 1, 2012 after the lapse of 20 years from the commencement date of the occupancy. Thus, Defendant B is obligated to implement the procedure for the registration of ownership transfer for each of the instant real estate on January 1, 2012 to the Plaintiff.
B. Judgment by publication of judgment (Article 208(3)3 of the Civil Procedure Act)
3. The State is not a registered titleholder on the judgment on the land cadastre of the Defendant’s Republic of Korea, or the identity of the registered titleholder is unknown, and the State continues to claim state ownership while denying the ownership of a third party, or in exceptional circumstances.