A. The Defendant owns a building without permission (hereinafter “instant unauthorized building”) on both the land of Jongno-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, Jongno-gu, Seoul and 382 square meters (hereinafter “instant real estate”) owned by the Plaintiff, and occupied part (b) and 29 square meters of the part (hereinafter “the part in the Defendant’s possession”) connected in order to each point of 8,9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, and 8 of the instant real estate, among the instant real estate.

B. Of the instant real property, the part occupied by the Defendant was installed with the ground fence (hereinafter “instant fence”) in the part (c) part of the building connected in sequence with each point of the items indicated in the attached Table 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 14, and 15, which is located on the part (c) of the instant building in line with the indication of 10, 11, 24, 25, and 10 of the same drawings (hereinafter “instant building”), which connects each point of 8, 9, 10, 11, 11, 12, 13, 14, and 8 of the same drawings, which are attached in sequence to the said part (hereinafter “instant toilet”).

[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy Facts, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 5, and 6 (including virtual numbers), the result of this court’s request for surveying and appraisal of the Korea Land Information Corporation, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. According to the above facts of determination as to the cause of the claim, the defendant is obligated to remove each of the buildings of this case, toilets of this case, and fences of this case constructed on the real estate of this case, and deliver the part occupied by the defendant among the real estate of this case to the plaintiff, unless there are special circumstances.

[A] According to the evidence Nos. 6, the Seoul Central District Court 2007da7625, 212353 (in a counterclaim, the Plaintiff had already been the owner of the building without permission at the time of the Plaintiff’s removal and delivery decision, and the above judgment became final and conclusive. After which the Defendant acquired the building without permission from the above E and succeeded to the possession of the real estate of this case, it is recognized that the Defendant succeeded to the possession of the real estate of this case, and the result of the court’