A. On April 8, 2019, the Plaintiff was entrusted with a 694 square meters and 56 square meters prior to D, Nam-si, Namyang-si, and completed the registration of ownership transfer in its name on April 11, 2019. On May 22, 2019, the Plaintiff was entrusted with a F large 1412 square meters from the said association and completed the registration of ownership transfer in its name on May 23, 2019.

B. A building listed in paragraph (4) of the attached Table 1 (hereinafter “instant building”) is constructed on each of the lands listed in paragraphs 1, 2, and 3 of the attached Table 1, located in the location of the branch where the boundary of F-1412 square meters, D previously 694 square meters, and E previously 56 square meters is located at the location of Manndong-si, Namyang-si (hereinafter “instant land”). As of the date of closing argument of the instant building, the Defendant owns the instant building as of the date of closing argument.

[Grounds for Recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap's statements or images, and the purport of the whole pleadings, as a whole, of Gap's statements 1, 2, and 3 (if there are separate numbers, including each number)

2. According to the above facts of determination as to the cause of the claim, the defendant who owned the building of this case without title and occupied the building of this case without title has the duty to remove the building of this case to the plaintiff who is the owner of the above land and deliver the land of this case.

3. As to the judgment of the defendant's assertion, the defendant asserts to the purport that he or she had a legitimate title to occupy and use the land of this case since he or she constructed the building of this case with the consent of the former owner of the land of this case and paid the land usage fees

However, even if the former owner of the instant land consented to the new construction of the instant building.

Even if the user fee for the land was paid by the defendant or his/her father, the rights and obligations pursuant thereto shall not be deemed to have been succeeded to the C Regional Housing Association or the plaintiff, and there is no evidence to deem otherwise that the defendant has a legitimate title to possess the land of this case that the defendant can oppose the plaintiff.

Therefore, the defendant's above assertion is accepted.