A. The Plaintiff (Appointed Party; hereinafter “Plaintiff”) and the designated parties shared a lot of 352 square meters (hereinafter “Plaintiff’s land”) in Jinju-si, Jinju-si. The Defendant owned the D-si, Jinju-si, 358 square meters (hereinafter “Defendant’s land”) and its ground buildings (hereinafter “Defendant’s building”).

B. When the Defendant operates a section sales store in the Defendant’s building, the Defendant has installed a structure, such as cement block block fence, fences, bricks, steel fences, steel agents wall, steel agents bridge, etc. on the ground connected in order to each point of the attached Table 1, 8, 7, 6, and 1 among the Plaintiff’s land on the Plaintiff’s side, and has occupied the part of the land by installing a structure, such as cement block block fence, fences, bricks, steel agents wall, steel agents bridge, etc. on the ground, and (2) connects each point of the attached Table 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, and 2 in the order of 2.4 square meters on the ground (hereinafter “second land section”), and has occupied the portion of the land by installing a light metal structure storage facility in the order of attached Table 2 (2), 5, 6, 7, and 5 on the ground; and (3) has occupied the portion of the land on the ground.

(hereinafter referred to as “each of the facilities of this case”). 【No dispute exists concerning each of the above facilities installed by the Defendant (hereinafter referred to as “each of the facilities of this case’s”), each entry of Gap 1 and 2 evidence (including paper numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply), Gap 4, 6, 7, and 10 through 18, each film of the evidence of Gap 4, 6, 7, and 10 through 18, the result of a request for measurement appraisal

2. Determination

A. The judgment of the plaintiff as to the cause of the claim is that the defendant installs each of the above land parts on the ground of the land parts Nos. 1, 2, and 3 among the plaintiff's land and occupies each of the above land parts. Thus, the plaintiff and the designated parties seeking the exclusion of interference with the plaintiff's land ownership. The defendant is obligated to remove each of the facilities of this case and deliver each