1. Revocation of the first instance judgment.

2. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

3. All costs of the lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Facts of recognition

The court's explanation on this part is the same as the corresponding part of the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, and thus, this part is cited in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

The Plaintiff’s assertion by the parties is the starting point of possession on June 10, 1994, which possessed the land in the dispute of this case through the ownership of the building of this case, and the network F, G, and the Plaintiff has occupied the land in the order of possession for at least 20 years as the intention of possession.

Therefore, since the acquisition by prescription of the Plaintiff’s land in the instant dispute was completed on or around June 10, 2014, the Defendant, who was the owner of the Defendant’s land at the time, is obligated to implement the registration procedure for transfer of ownership based on the completion of the acquisition by prescription as to the land in the instant dispute.

However, even though the Defendant knew that the prescriptive acquisition of the Plaintiff’s land in this case was completed, he donated the Defendant’s land to H on October 30, 2014 and completed the registration of ownership transfer, which is null and void as an act contrary to social order.

The Defendant’s assertion F and G’s possession of the instant dispute land shall be deemed as the possession of the owner, and the possession of the Plaintiff who succeeded to the said possession also constitutes the possession of the owner.

Judgment

Whether the Plaintiff’s right to claim ownership transfer registration upon the completion of acquisition by prescription against the Defendant is an independent possession with the intention of possession or with no intention of possession by the occupant is not determined by the internal deliberation of the possessor, but by the nature of the title that caused the acquisition by prescription, or all circumstances related to the possession, should be determined externally and objectively. Therefore, it is proved that the possessor acquired the ownership on the basis of the title that the possessor does not have the intention of ownership by nature, or that the possessor excluded the ownership of another person by excluding the ownership of another person.