The Defendant, as the Plaintiff

(a)each entry in the separate sheet;

A. The Plaintiff is the owner of each real estate listed in the separate sheet.

B. On April 29, 201, the Plaintiff entered into an entrustment contract with the Korea Rural Community Corporation with respect to the lease management of the land owned by the Plaintiff, including the real estate listed in the attached Table, 19 parcel of land owned by the Plaintiff, including the real estate listed in the attached Table, from April 29, 201 to April 28, 2019. The Korea Rural Community Corporation established an entrustment contract with respect to the number of leased farmland with the terms of entrusting the lease of KRW 4,445,00 with the annual rent of KRW 32,437 square meters on the same day from April 29, 201 to April 28, 2019. The Korea Rural Community Corporation set the annual rent of KRW 4,445,000 from April 29, 2011 to April 28, 2019.

(c)

Since the above lease agreement, 4 greenhouses and 2 appurtenant facilities (hereinafter “the instant vinyls, etc.”) were installed on the ground of each land indicated in the attached Table, such as the indication of attached drawings, and the size of the site is 1,109m25m2 (hereinafter “the instant site”). D.

On December 31, 2017, the Defendant purchased the instant plastic houses, etc. and various equipment and materials from D, which were the preceding parts of the instant land, in 1,000,000 won in large amounts, and had been engaged in the farming shed in the year 2018.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap 3, 9, 10, 12, 13, and 14, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. We examine ex officio whether the part of the instant lawsuit relating to the claim for land recovery is lawful.

The purport of the claim in civil procedure is that the contents and scope of the claim shall be clearly identified in the complaint for the purpose of specifying the subject matter of lawsuit and the scope of the trial in the court.

However, among the lawsuit in this case, the part of the claim for land recovery is clearly indicated “the extent to which the rice farmer can grow,” but does not specify the subject, contents, scope, etc. of land recovery. Therefore, the purport of the claim is clearly specified.

As it is not possible to see it, there is no law.

3. Determination on the cause of the claim

(a) removal;