On February 7, 2002, the Deceased completed the registration of ownership transfer on the instant land to E, who was son, based on donation, and thereafter transferred the instant building unregistered to the Defendant. On December 22, 2004, the Defendant completed the registration of ownership transfer on the instant building.

The Plaintiffs completed the registration of ownership transfer on March 4, 2015, based on sale and purchase, 1/2 shares of the instant land.

[Ground of recognition] The plaintiffs asserted that the defendant, the owner of the building of this case, occupied the land of this case without legitimate title, and that the plaintiffs are obligated to remove the building of this case and deliver the land of this case, since the plaintiff, the owner of the building of this case, as stated in Gap evidence 1-1, Gap evidence 1-2, Gap evidence 2, Gap evidence 2, 3, and 4, the purport of the whole pleadings, and the assertion of

In this regard, the defendant asserts that since the defendant is in a position to acquire legal superficies under customary law for the ownership of the building of this case with respect to the land of this case, it cannot comply with the plaintiffs'

Judgment

In cases where land and buildings belonging to the same person belong to different owners due to sale, gift, compulsory sale by official auction, public sale under the National Tax Collection Act, etc., the owner of the building shall acquire the legal superficies under customary law concerning the site for the purpose of removing the building unless otherwise stipulated that the owner of the building remove the building, and the building shall not be an unauthorized building, unregistered building, or unregistered building unless it satisfies the requirements as the building (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 87Meu2404, Apr. 12, 198).