A. The building indicated in the attached list (hereinafter “instant building”) is owned by the Plaintiff.

B. The Defendant, as the Plaintiff’s child, completed a move-in report on the building of this case on July 27, 2010, and is residing in the building of this case due to the establishment of one unit of pianos.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap 1 to 3 evidence, Eul 1 to 4 evidence (including paper numbers), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. According to the above facts of determination as to the cause of the claim, the building of this case is owned by the plaintiff. Since the defendant occupies the building of this case, the defendant is obligated to collect one amno, which is located in the building of this case, and deliver the building of this case to the plaintiff, unless there is any assertion or proof of the right to possess the building of this case.

B. As of the Defendant’s assertion and its determination (1) as of the Defendant’s assertion, the Plaintiff, the father of the Defendant, wasting and guiding the property, and the Defendant’s deceptions to deprive the Plaintiff of the property.

Therefore, the defendant, who is his father, has the right to possess the building of this case in order to protect the plaintiff's property and to protect the defendant's legal reserve of inheritance.

(2) However, as alleged by the Defendant, the grounds alleged by the Defendant cannot be a legitimate title to occupy the building of this case. Thus, the Defendant’s above assertion is without merit.

3. In conclusion, the plaintiff's claim of this case is reasonable, and it is so decided as per Disposition.