B. The act of Gap company's act of exercising its power at the construction site of Eul and setting up a banner and a signboard and putting letters on the wall is likely to obstruct Eul's construction and possession at the construction site, and thus, it is an infringement of the current legal interests of Eul, and thus, it is reasonable to view Eul's act as a defense against the infringement.

Examining the reasoning of the judgment below comparison with the construction site records, it is reasonable to view that the defendant's act of installing a new building of the third floor above the ground surface on the three lots of land of this case by being awarded a contract with the maximum f44,00,000 won for the construction of the building of the third floor above the ground surface, and was transferred all rights, such as the right to sell the building above, due to the failure to receive construction cost, and thus, it cannot be viewed that the defendant's act of acquiring the right to take over the above two lots of land without any justifiable reasons to believe that the creditor who provided materials or money to the defendant in the above construction process constitutes the creditor group, and there is no violation of the rules of evidence against the defendant's right to take over the above construction site, and therefore, it cannot be viewed that the defendant's act of acquiring the right to take over the above construction site without any justifiable reasons, and there is no violation of the rules of evidence against the defendant's right to take over the construction site and there is no violation of the rules of evidence.

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.

Justices Ansan-man (Presiding Justice)