1. The Defendant: (a) is not less than 645 square meters in Seosan-si, the Plaintiff:

(a) connect each point of the separate sheet No. 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5;

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is the owner of the land and building owned by the Plaintiff (hereinafter “the Plaintiff-owned land and building in this case”) and the Defendant is the owner of the building and building adjacent to the said land and the building and building owned by the Defendant (hereinafter “the land and building owned by the Defendant in this case”), and the building and building on the ground (hereinafter “the land and building owned by the Defendant in this case”), and the road of 18 square meters in each of D roads (hereinafter “the road in this case”).

B. Around 2017, the Defendant installed a brick fence with a width of 20 cm and height of 130 cm on the line connecting each point of the attached Table 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 with the appraisal map indicated in the attached sheet No. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, and 1. Of the land owned by the Plaintiff, the said fence invadedd the part of “A” (hereinafter “the instant part”) of the attached sheet No. 4 square meters connected each point of the Plaintiff’s land.

C. In addition, the Defendant installed a wall with a width of 20 cm and height of 130 cm (hereinafter collectively referred to as the “instant wall”) from among the instant road parts, which connects each point of 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, and 7 of the attached Form Nos. 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, and 7 to the Defendant’s site, and thereby the Plaintiff was unable to use the instant road as an access road to the building.

[Ground of recognition] The facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1-1, Gap evidence 1-2, Gap evidence 2-1, 2, and 3-1, 2, and 3; the result of this court's commission of surveying and appraisal to the Korean Land and Land Information Corporation, the results of the on-site verification conducted by this court, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. According to the facts of the determination on the removal and delivery of the instant “A” portion, the Defendant is obligated to remove the instant “A” portion and deliver the said portion to the Plaintiff seeking the removal of interference based on ownership unless there is any evidence showing that the Defendant had a legitimate possessory right to the instant “A” portion.

B. Removal of the “B” portion and confirmation of traffic rights.