A. Defendant B is among the real estate listed in the separate sheet No. 2.

A. The land was owned by Nonparty J and K around June 26, 2001. On October 16, 2002, Nonparty L transferred the said L’s share, and Nonparty M and N purchased the said L’s share on April 11, 2006 through a voluntary auction procedure conducted on October 13, 2013. The Plaintiff purchased the said land from NonpartyO on January 5, 201, and completed the registration of ownership transfer on the same day.

B. On the ground of the instant site, Nonparty P built a new building, such as the building permit issued on June 22, 2001 and the drawings indicated in attached Tables 2 and 3, and on May 13, 2005, Nonparty Q sold the said building to Nonparty L, and thereafter on April 28, 2015, Nonparty Q owned the said building.

C. In addition, Nonparty J newly constructed a building on the ground of the instant site, such as the drawings in [Attachment 7] and [Attachment 8].

The defendants occupy each part of the above buildings as stated in the purport of the claim.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 7, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

(a) Even in cases where the owner of land is entitled to demand the owner of the building to remove the building or deliver its site on account of a lack of the right to use the building for its existence, if a person other than the owner of the building occupies the building, the owner of land shall not implement the removal, etc. of the building unless such building is removed;

Therefore, the land ownership is deemed to have been interfered with the smooth realization of the land by the above possession. Therefore, the land owner may request the possessor of the building to withdraw from the building as an exclusion of interference based on his own ownership.

In this case, the above 1 and 2 buildings are not entitled to use the land for their existence, except in extenuating circumstances.