A. Comprehensively taking account of the overall purport of Gap evidence No. 1, Gap evidence No. 2, Eul evidence No. 4, Eul evidence No. 1, and Eul evidence No. 1, the plaintiffs shared each land as stated in the claim claim (hereinafter "each land of this case") from September 17, 1999 (hereinafter "the plaintiffs' shares: 4172/4205, Plaintiff B's shares: 33/4205), and the defendants are obligated to remove the building of this case as long as they acquired one/2 shares of each of the buildings on the ground of each land of this case (hereinafter "the building of this case") and shared one/2 shares of each of the buildings on April 15, 2015 and June 26, 2015. Since there is no counter-proof evidence, the defendants are obligated to remove the building of this case to the plaintiffs so long as they did not assert or prove the existence of possessory right of each of the land of this case.

B. The part of the claim for restitution of unjust enrichment equivalent to the rent is that the Defendants are obligated to pay the Plaintiffs the amount equivalent to the rent of KRW 500,000 per month from April 15, 2015 to the completion date of delivery of each of the instant land. However, since April 15, 2015, the Defendants occupied and used each of the instant land owned by the Plaintiffs, thereby gaining profits equivalent to the amount claimed by the Plaintiffs, and thereby, there is no evidence to prove that the Plaintiffs suffered losses equivalent to the same amount. Accordingly, this part of the Plaintiff’s assertion is without merit.

2. The Defendants asserted as to the Defendants’ assertion that, around June 2015, they concluded a lease agreement with Plaintiff A and each of the instant lands during a fixed period from May 22, 2015 to May 21, 2016, they have the right to occupy each of the instant lands until May 21, 2016, and that they may exercise the right to claim renewal of the lease agreement and the right to purchase the instant building.