A. The plaintiff is a clan with the descendants of the 21-year-old E who are members of the clan.

The F, which was the plaintiff's clan member, died in around 1987, and the defendant B is the wife of F, and the defendant C is the plaintiff's clan member of F.

B. The Plaintiff is the owner of the land indicated in the attached Table 1 list and the land indicated in the attached Table 2 list.

C. around 191, Defendant B purchased from G the 107 square meters of the land indicated in attached Table 1 List No. 1 from G, 1991 (the part 1 of attached Form 3 drawings, hereinafter “instant building”) of the brickd building without permission, and is currently residing in the instant building.

The Defendants are in possession of a plastic greenhouse of 102 square meters (section 2 of the attached Form 3), a plastic greenhouse of 102 square meters (section 2 of the attached Table 3), a 18 square meters (section 3 of the attached Table 3), and a plastic greenhouse of 44 square meters (section 5 of the attached Table 3; section 4 of the attached Table 1; section 5 of the attached Table 3); and section 44 square meters on the land listed in paragraph 3 of the attached Table 1 list.

E. On the ground specified in paragraph 4 of the current annexed Table 1, the building materials of this case are filled up.

[Ground of recognition] A without dispute; Gap evidence Nos. 2, 9, 17, 18; Eul evidence Nos. 1 (including those with serial numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply); the result of this court’s request for surveying and appraisal of appraiser H; the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. The land listed in the separate sheet No. 1, and the land listed in the separate sheet No. 1, as to the cause of the claim, is owned by the plaintiff, the defendant B occupied the building of this case, and the fact that the defendants occupied the land of this case is in possession of the land of this case is as seen earlier.

In addition, the following facts and circumstances, which can be recognized by comprehensively taking into account the respective descriptions of Gap evidence Nos. 2, 7, and 9 and the overall purport of the pleadings, are divided into the land of Gyeonggi-do, Gyeonggi-do, 1 on May 8, 2006, and the defendant ②.