토지인도
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
1. The gist of the party’s assertion is that the Defendant occupies the instant land without any legal cause on the premise that the Plaintiff is the owner of 10,810 square meters of C forest land (hereinafter “instant land”) around e.g., the Plaintiff claims for the removal of the instant land, such as the delivery of the land and the container, and the return of unjust enrichment equivalent to the rent, as stated in paragraph (1) of the claim. In addition, the Plaintiff claims for restitution of the land due to the termination of the lease contract due to the delay in rent and claims for restitution of unjust enrichment equivalent
2. In full view of the purport of the argument as a result of the fact-finding inquiry about whether to conclude a lease contract under subparagraph 1, Eul's evidence, witness D's testimony, and gender viewing, the defendant leased the land from E where the owner of the land of this case owned to the present time to the present date, and the plaintiff purchased the land of this case from E on July 16, 2010 and completed the registration of ownership transfer under the Plaintiff's name. The plaintiff succeeded to the status of E's lease contract with the defendant on January 16, 2014 when renewal of the existing lease contract with the defendant on December 31, 2010, the farmland lease contract (No. 1 certificate) with the term of lease as of December 31, 200, the plaintiff's seal impression is affixed to the above lease contract, and the plaintiff's seal impression is affixed to the land use approval form in the Plaintiff's name submitted for e-mail viewing, and the plaintiff's seal impression is affixed to the plaintiff's 200 billion won per year.
Therefore, the defendant does not have any exception.