A. Attached Form 2 Appraisal No. 1. Of the real estate indicated in the attached Form 1’s indication.

A. Defendant B Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant B”) owns a 2,480 square meters of land E (hereinafter “instant adjacent land”) and its ground factory at the time when the Plaintiff’s assertion was adjacent to the instant land owned by the Plaintiff, and without any authority with Defendant D Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant D”), cement packaging is conducted on the instant sunken land and uses it as a factory site.

Therefore, Defendant B and the Plaintiff, the owner of the land at issue, should remove cement packaging installed on the land at issue and deliver the land at issue, and return unjust enrichment equivalent to rent due to the use of the land at issue.

B. Determination 1) According to the results of the measurement and appraisal of evidence Nos. 1, 2, 3, and 6 (the number of pages is included; hereinafter the same shall apply) and each statement or image of evidence Nos. 1, 2, 3, and 6 (the number of pages is included) and the court entrusted to the Korea Land Information Corporation branch, it can be acknowledged that the Plaintiff owned the land of this case and cement packaging was made on the land of this case. However, the above evidence alone is insufficient to recognize that Defendant B was packing cement on the land of this case or used while occupying the land of this case as a factory site, etc., and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it. 2) Rather, in light of the following facts or circumstances, it seems that Defendant D, who entered into a lease agreement with Defendant B, the owner of the adjacent land of this case, etc., was on cement packaging and occupying, using, and using it on the land of this case.

On April 1, 2008, Defendant B entered into a lease agreement with Defendant D on the land other than the instant adjacent land.

Defendant D’s above lease agreement.