2. The costs of appeal are assessed against the Defendants.

Purport of claim and appeal

1.

2. Judgment on the defendants' assertion

A. Determination as to the assertion of statutory superficies under customary law 1) The Defendants asserted by the Defendants were to construct the instant building with the consent to use the instant land from C, the former owner of the instant land, and there was no special agreement to remove the instant building even if the owner of the instant land is changed. As such, the statutory superficies under customary law was established when the land and the building were owned by the same owner, but the said owner becomes different for sale and purchase of the said building or the land due to reasons other than the said sale, and there is no room for establishing statutory superficies under customary law when the said building was constructed with the consent of the owner of the land (see Supreme Court Decision 90Meu2603, Oct. 30, 1990). The Defendants’ assertion is without merit.

B. Determination on the abuse of rights claim 1) Since the plaintiff's assertion that the plaintiff's claim constitutes an abuse of right, the plaintiff's claim of this case is in progress with an auction procedure on the land of this case. Thus, even if the plaintiff received the land of this case, there is no benefit to the plaintiff because it is difficult to promote the regional housing association project in the land of this case, but the defendants lose their residential environment due to the removal of the building of this case and delivery of the land of this case, and thus, there is a great disadvantage to the defendants. In light of these circumstances, if the plaintiff's claim of this case can be deemed as abuse of right, the purpose of exercising right is to inflict damages on the other party.