A. On September 3, 2018, the Plaintiff completed the registration of transfer of ownership with respect to D, 190 square meters (hereinafter “the instant land”) in Yangyang-gun, Yangyang-gun (hereinafter “Eri”).

B. On July 24, 191, the Defendant (Withdrawal) completed registration of preservation of ownership as to cement bricks, bricks, sloping roof, one story house, 86.42 square meters adjacent to the instant land (hereinafter “instant building”).

C. Of the instant building, part of the instant building intrudes on the part (B) and 7 square meters (hereinafter “B”) of the instant building, which connects each point of the instant land indicated in the Appendix No. 14, 13, 4, 16, 15, and 14, in sequence, among the instant land.

On November 23, 2018, when the instant lawsuit is pending, the Defendant’s intervenor was donated the instant building from the Defendant (Withdrawal) and completed the registration of ownership transfer on the ground of such donation on November 26, 2018.

Accordingly, the defendant-appellant accepted the lawsuit of this case on behalf of the defendant (ex officio), and the defendant (ex officio) withdrawn from the lawsuit of this case with the plaintiff's consent.

[Ground of Recognition] A without dispute, entry (including additional number) in Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 5, the result of the appraisal commission to the Korea Land Information Corporation by this Court, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. According to the above facts of determination as to the cause of the claim, the defendant-appellant is obligated to remove the part of the building in question, which affected the land (B) from the building in question, and deliver (B) the land to the plaintiff.

3. In light of the overall purport of the oral argument as to the assertion by the defendant and the intervenor, it is deemed that the defendant and the intervenor are also invoked as they are.

A. The Defendant’s Intervenor asserts as follows.

“Around January 31, 191, the Defendant (Withdrawal) continued to possess the instant building for not less than 20 years after newly building the instant building and occupying the (B) land. As such, the period of prescription for the acquisition of possession was completed on or around January 31, 201.” However, according to the assertion by the respective intervenors, the effect of the completion of the prescription is effective even if following the assertion by the Defendant.