토지인도
1. The Defendant: (a) is not less than 456§³ in Gangnam-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government; (b)
(a)each point in the separate sheet No. 2, 3, 15, 14, and 2;
1. Facts of recognition;
A. On November 14, 2003, the Plaintiff completed the registration of ownership transfer on the ground of sale on September 30, 2003 with respect to the Gangnam-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government B large 456 square meters (hereinafter “instant 1”).
B. On January 22, 2016, the Defendant purchased and owned the Gangnam-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government C large 622 square meters adjacent to the instant land (hereinafter “instant land”) and its ground buildings adjacent to the instant land through a voluntary auction procedure (hereinafter “instant land 2”).
C. On September 2016, the Defendant installed the boiler room, fence wall, retaining wall, and concrete floor structure (automobile lamps) on the ground of this case on the instant land No. 2, and owned and managed them. A part of which is indicated in the attached Form No. 1 of the land of this case, is installed on the land of this case on the land of 1 that is located on the land of this case, on the land of 1m2, 3m2, 7m2 on the land of this case, and is occupied and used by the Defendant.
[Ground of recognition] A without dispute, each entry or video of Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 9, the result of appraiser D's appraisal, the purport of the whole pleadings
2. According to the above facts, the Defendant, without any particular right, installed the boiler room in the above part of the land owned by the Plaintiff, the wall retaining wall in the above part of the ground part of the above part of the (b) (c) and the concrete floor structure in the above part (d) above on the ground (e.g., a concrete floor structure in the above part of the (d) inside the said ship, without any specific right. The Defendant can recognize the fact that the Defendant occupied the part (b) in the part (c) in the ship among the land No. 1 in the ship, the part (c) in the part (
Therefore, the defendant is obligated to remove the above boiler room, wall wall, and concrete floor structure (motor vehicle lamps) to the plaintiff and deliver each part of the above occupied land to the plaintiff.
As to this, the Defendant submitted and obtained approval for use of the cross-border surveying by the former owner of the land No. 2 on the ground of this case. Thus, the Defendant had no choice but to believe that the existing boundaries are justifiable, and the land No. 1 and No. 2 on the ground of this case belongs to the termination area.