A. 1) On December 9, 2016, the Plaintiff: (a) on December 9, 2016, the B large scale of 840 square meters (hereinafter “instant land”).

(2) On November 8, 2016, the Defendant completed the registration of ownership transfer on the ground of sale and purchase on the land in this case on April 15, 2007, the registration of ownership transfer was completed. 2) The Defendant, from C, on April 15, 2007, the following: (a) the attached drawing indication, (b) the attached drawing among the land in this case, (7), (8), (9), (1), (1), (2), (1), (2), (3), (2), (3), (4), (2), (4), (2), (4), (4), (3), (4), (4), (4), (4), (4), (5), (4) and (4) of the attached drawings, (238.32 square meters of the roof of cement block, and (29.16 square meters of cement block, which are linked in turn to each of the above parts, and operates the “D” company as human resources by leasing them for possession.

[Ground for Recognition] Unsatisfy, each entry in Gap evidence 1 to 12 (including a tentative number)

B. The Plaintiff, as a result of the exclusion of interference based on the ownership of the instant land, may request the Defendant, the possessor of the instant building, to leave the building.

2. The defendant's judgment on the defendant's defense dispute concludes a lease contract on the building of this case in 35,000,000 won from C, and occupies the above building. C dies and C cannot respond to the plaintiff's claim before receiving the lease deposit from the heir.

However, as a removal of interference based on ownership, the owner of the land may claim the withdrawal of the building from the possessor of the building. This does not change because the possessor of the building has the so-called opposing power as the lessee from the owner of the building.

Since the opposing power of the building lease is basically a building and is not the purpose of land, the ownership of the land cannot be restricted, and even if there is a right of lease with opposing power against the building in the land, it is against the land owner.