A. On December 21, 2006, the registration of transfer of ownership in the name of each plaintiff was completed with respect to the land of 314 square meters and 262 square meters prior to D, Nam-gu Incheon Metropolitan City C Cemetery 314 square meters and 262 square meters prior to D (hereinafter “instant land”).

B. On March 201, the Plaintiff newly constructed a building on the instant land as indicated in the separate sheet (the name of the owner: the Plaintiff; hereinafter “instant building”) and the present building is unregistered because it did not undergo a completion inspection.

C. On November 10, 2014, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit claiming the title of the building in Incheon District Court 2014Da74574 against E, which had occupied the instant building as of November 10, 201, and was rendered a judgment in favor of the Plaintiff on January 24, 2017 ordering delivery of the instant building and return of unjust enrichment on the ground that the Plaintiff had acquired the ownership of the said building at the time. The said judgment became final and conclusive on December 14, 2017.

Meanwhile, from February 2015 to the date of closing the argument in this case, Defendant A continued to reside on the first floor of the building in this case, and Defendant B continued to reside on the second floor of the building in this case.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 4, purport of whole pleadings

2. It is insufficient to recognize that the Defendants, solely based on the evidence No. 1, obtained the right of possession of the claim for construction cost as the lien holder, holding the claim for construction cost by inserting construction costs during the new construction process of the instant building and directly participating in its construction.

As long as the Defendants did not prove their respective titles of possession, they are obligated to withdraw from each part of their possession to the Plaintiff, the owner of the instant building.