The real estate listed in paragraph (1) of the list (hereinafter “instant real estate”) is owned by the Plaintiff; the Defendants occupied the instant real estate from around 2006 to build an unauthorized building and cultivate surrounding forests and fields; the Plaintiff notified the Defendants of the demand for restitution and the imposition of indemnity after the discovery of the above fact; and the Plaintiff filed an application for a provisional disposition prohibiting the transfer of real estate by the Plaintiff against the Defendants on the acceptance of the application against the Defendants of the provisional disposition (Seoul District Court Order 2019Kadan102925, Jan. 7, 2020; Order 2020Kadan10585, Mar. 9, 2020) is exempt from each entry listed in subparagraphs 1 through 6 (including the serial number; hereinafter the same shall apply).

According to the above facts, the defendants occupied and used the land of this case owned by the plaintiff without permission. Thus, the defendants are obligated to remove each ground building, etc. in the Disposition Nos. 1 and 2 existing on the land of this case and deliver the land of this case to the plaintiff who is the owner of the land of this case.

On the other hand, while the Plaintiff sought removal of the parts of the building as stated in Paragraph (1) of the Disposition against Defendant D, the evidence submitted by the Plaintiff alone is insufficient to view that Defendant D possessed each part of the building as stated in Paragraph (1) of the Disposition, and there is no other evidence to

The plaintiff's assertion in this part is without merit.

If so, the plaintiff's claim against the defendant A, B, and C is justified, and the claim against the defendant D is justified within the above scope of recognition, and it is accepted and the remaining claim is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition.