1. The defendant shall be the plaintiff.

A. Attached Form

1. Removal of each building listed in the list of buildings;

(b) Boju-si Cheongju C.

Facts of recognition

On June 16, 1999, the Plaintiff completed the registration of transfer of ownership with respect to the entire land of 347 square meters of the Sinju-si, Cheongju-si (hereinafter “instant land”).

On January 4, 1999, the Defendant donated the instant house with earth, brick, straw-projected 26.45 square meters (hereinafter “instant house”) located on the ground of the instant land, and completed the registration of ownership transfer on January 11, 1999.

Current status of the land of this case at present is attached Form

1. It is identical to the drawings attached to the list of buildings, and currently on the ground of this case, the attached Form owned by the defendant;

1. Each building entered in the list of buildings is located;

For the instant house: Attached Form

1. The building appears to be part of the building described in paragraph 1.

(ii) [The entry in each subparagraph of Gap, 2, 3, 3, 3, 5-1, 5-2, 8-1, and 8-2 based on recognition, and the result of the on-site verification conducted by this Court, the results of the survey and appraisal conducted by appraiser D, and the purport of the whole pleadings.

According to the facts of the determination of the request for removal and the request for delivery of land, the defendant of this case's house and attached Form on the land of this case

1. It is deemed that the entire land of this case is occupied by owning each building entered in the list of buildings, and the defendant has a legitimate title to occupy the land of this case, barring any special circumstance, according to the plaintiff's claim claiming the exclusion of disturbance based on the ownership of the land of this case and the attached Form located on the land of this case.

1. All buildings, such as building list, are removed and the Plaintiff is obligated to deliver the instant land to the Plaintiff.

The defendant asserts that the plaintiff's claim for removal of the building of this case and delivery of the land of this case was made with respect to the land of this case with no agreement between the plaintiff and the defendant for the purpose of owning the building of this case and the termination thereof by the plaintiff. Thus, the plaintiff's claim for purchase of the building of this case under Articles 643 and 283 of the Civil Code was exercised.