2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

A. The plaintiff's assertion is the owner of the land of this case. The defendant constructed a 3-story building in the vicinity of the land of this case. Among them, about 10 square meters in part (A) of the purport of the claim, the part of the plaintiff's land of this case was invaded by the plaintiff. The defendant is obligated to remove the part on the ground of the violation and deliver the part on the part on the

B. The Defendant asserted that the Defendant did not commit a crime, even if he did not have committed such crime.

Even in the case of this case claiming the prescriptive acquisition, the plaintiff must prove whether the defendant's building infringed on the plaintiff's land of this case and what accurate boundary is through the method of surveying, appraisal, etc., but did not comply with the repeated statement of this court.

The written evidence No. 1-4 submitted by the Plaintiff alone is insufficient to acknowledge the fact of intrusion on the land of the Defendant building, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it.

In addition, the plaintiff's assertion that if the part of the land area of this case is corrected, damage caused by the reduction of the area is too large is not enough to be exempted from this case's proof. Thus, the plaintiff's above assertion cannot be accepted.

2. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.