원상복구회복등
1. The successor's claim that has been changed in exchange at the trial is dismissed;
2. The total cost of the lawsuit is the plaintiff and the plaintiff.
1. The ownership of D land and the reasons for the succession participation;
A. On March 9, 2010, the Plaintiff donated 370 square meters of land in the instant dispute to the succeeding intervenor on March 9, 2010 where the lawsuit in the first instance trial is pending, and completed the registration of ownership transfer in the name of the succeeding intervenor on March 10, 2010.
B. On January 28, 201, the succeeding intervenor filed an application for intervention in succession on the pending trial on January 28, 201, and the Plaintiff withdrawn from the lawsuit of this case on April 20, 2011.
2. Determination as to a claim for the restoration of wells to their original state and a pool to their original state
A. The gist of the succeeding intervenor’s assertion is to reclaim wells in the land owned by the succeeding intervenor, and to cut off the pipe from the above wells of the succeeding intervenor by cutting a pool on the land owned by the defendant and cutting down the pipe from the above wells of the succeeding intervenor, and thus, the succeeding intervenor’s above wells are obliged to restore the said wells to the original state and close down the pool of land owned by the defendant
B. According to the evidence Nos. 7 and 1 evidence, the result of the on-site inspection conducted by the court of first instance, and the result of the survey and appraisal conducted by the appraiser G of the first instance trial, there is a well (hereinafter referred to as “contestable matter”) on the part of 73.4 square meters in the ship, which connected each point of 370 square meters in sequence, the land owned by the succeeding intervenor, and on the part of 73.4 square meters in the ship, which is owned by the succeeding intervenor, and on the part of 73.4 square meters in order, the fact that there exists a pooling matter (hereinafter referred to as “contestable matter”) on the part of 3,012 square meters in the second drawing on the land owned by the defendant. The fact that there exists a pooling part of 28.3 square meters in the ship, which connects each point of 1,2,3,012 square meters in order.
However, the Defendant buried a ploss by each video of Gap's evidence 7, 10, 11, and 15 (including any number number; hereinafter the same shall apply) and testimony of Gap's witness I and J alone.
The part of the succeeding intervenor's assertion is without merit without further review, as there is no other evidence to acknowledge that it illegally brings water from the bend or the bend of the pipe.
3. Judgment on the claim for the installation of a building.