점유취득시효의 완성 후 소유명의가 변동한 경우 취득시효 가능여부 - 대법원 2009.7.16. 2007다15172, 15189 전원합의체 판결 -

Abstract

The Article 245 of Civil Act of Korea provides the Acquisitive Prescription. The Supreme Court has established five principles regarding acquisitive prescription. Among them, fifth principle(Korean Supreme Court 1994. 3.22, 94다46360) was that if an original possessor possess continuously the same real property and the period for acquiring ownership has been completed by reckoning a new starting point, though the transfer to the third party of the ownership has been done after completion of acquisitive prescription, he or she can allege the completion of acquisitive prescription. In this case(Korean Supreme Court 2009.7.16, 2007다50420), the defendant bought the land and possessed for 20 years. However, the land was registrated to ‘A’ before defendant's registration. Thereafter, the defendant has possessed the land without registration. The ownership of the land has been transferred from ‘A’ to ‘B’. The Supreme Court changed the previous precedent(Korean Supreme Court 1994.3.22, 94다46360). The previous one demanded that the name of registration is same and the transfer of ownership has not bee done during new period for acquiring ownership in order to allege the completion of the second acquisitive prescription. However, The Supreme Court changed the previous one on the ground that though the nominee of the registration transfer the ownership, it has not the effect of the grounds of interruption. The changed precedent make it easier for possessor to acquire the ownership.