The reasons for this part are as follows, and this part of the court's decision is the same as the corresponding part of the court's decision of the first instance except for the entry as follows.

Following the 7th sentence of the first instance court’s decision, “AYdo defaulted” was added to “AYdo defaulted.”

The phrase “G and H” is added to “V” next to the first instance judgment of the first instance court, and the phrase “G, H” and “P” of the first instance judgment No. 5 are deleted. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion is that the instant building was constructed with their own effort and materials. Of the instant building, the Defendants occupied each of the instant real estate without title. Therefore, in subrogation of the Defendants, for the purpose of preserving their claims against AY, the Plaintiff seeks to deliver each of the instant real estate possessed to AY to the Plaintiff first and the Defendants first deliver each of the instant real estate to the Plaintiff. This part of the judgment on the instant safety defense by the Defendants is identical to the corresponding part of the first instance judgment, and thus, this part of the judgment on the instant safety defense is citing it as is by the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act. First of all, the construction of the instant building is deemed to be an independent real estate at the time when the instant building was independent, and the construction of the instant building is within the scope of 10% of the roof and 5% of the instant building, 200.5% of the instant building.