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

2. The Plaintiff (Counter-Defendant) appears to have raised a high time to the Defendant-Counterclaim Plaintiff.

A principal lawsuit and a counterclaim shall be deemed simultaneously.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On February 9, 1998, the Plaintiff completed the registration of ownership transfer on the ground of sale on February 8, 1998 with respect to one-half share of 1/2 of the 153 square meters (hereinafter “instant land”).

B. The land category of the instant case was changed from January 24, 1979 to “road”, and the Defendant occupied and used the instant land as a road from around that time until that time.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 2 (including branch numbers, if any; hereinafter the same shall apply), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. According to the above facts of recognition as to the cause of the principal claim, the defendant continued to possess and use the land of this case owned by the plaintiff from January 24, 1979 to the present date. Thus, barring any special circumstance, the plaintiff is obligated to return unjust enrichment equivalent to the rent from the possession and use of the land of this case to the plaintiff.

3. Determination on the prescriptive acquisition defense by the defendant and the defendant's counterclaim

A. On April 28, 1978, the defendant's assertion entered into a sales contract to purchase each of the above lands at KRW 889,700 in total with e/F holding 240 square meters and 17 square meters in order to purchase each of the above lands at KRW 889,700, which includes the land in this case. On May 6, 1978, the defendant occupied each of the above lands in peace and public performance with intent to own each of the above lands from May 6, 1978.

In light of evidence, it is evident that the Defendant commenced possession of the instant land on May 6, 1978, and that the Defendant occupied the instant land in peace and openly for not less than 20 years with the intent to own the instant land. The same applies even if the Plaintiff’s initial date of February 9, 1988, which acquired the ownership of 1/2 shares out of the instant land, was deemed as the initial date of February 9, 198. The Defendant acquired the ownership of the instant land on the ground of the completion of the prescriptive acquisition period on February 9, 2010, which was 20 years from February 9, 1988.

B. Determination 1 occupies the instant land for 20 years.