The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

Litigation costs shall be borne by the plaintiff.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On May 15, 1923, the Plaintiff’s fleet D, whose permanent domicile is in the Gyeonggi-gun Group C, died on May 15, 192, and the head of South-Nam solely inherited his/her own property, and E/her children died on January 15, 2002 and jointly succeeded to the property of E.

B. On September 21, 1910, the Gyeonggi-gun J Forest 2807 (hereinafter “Mag land”) was assessed by the Dong K residing in the Gyeonggi-gun-gun (hereinafter “Mag-ri land”) (hereinafter “Mag-ri land”).

C. Undeveloped land was partitioned into 44 square meters on March 20, 1953 and 2763 square meters on L, and was cadastral restored.

Since then, the land B was converted into a unit of area on October 5, 197, and was 145 square meters of the road B, which is the land in this case, and on September 4, 1992, the Defendant had registered the preservation of ownership.

Before L, 2763 et al., the registration of preservation of ownership was completed on June 25, 1965.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 8, purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The plaintiff's assertion is based on the ground of the claim in this case, and on the premise that K and D, the plaintiff's preferred owner of the mother's land, are the same person, although the defendant completed the registration of preservation of ownership on the land in this case but there is a separate name of the circumstances, the presumption of preservation of ownership is broken. Thus, the plaintiff seeks cancellation of registration of preservation of ownership against the defendant by the act of preservation of common property

On the other hand, the defendant asserts that the acquisition by prescription has been completed by occupying the land in this case with the intention of ownership for at least 20 years, peace and public performance.

B. We examine the Defendant’s assertion on the prescriptive acquisition prior to determining whether K and the Plaintiff’s prior purchaser D, who is the title holder of the Defendant’s decision on the completion of the prescriptive acquisition.

If the nature of possessory source of real estate is not clear, the possessor is presumed to have possession in good faith, peace, and public performance by his own will in accordance with Article 197(1) of the Civil Code.

This presumption is a state that is a management entity of cadastral records.