1.The judgment of the first instance shall be modified as follows:

Defendant’s Intervenors KRW 19,612,00 and this is applicable to the Plaintiff.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is the owner of Seodaemun-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government E large 186 square meters (hereinafter “Plaintiff’s land”), and F owned D large 59.2 square meters (hereinafter “Defendant’s land”) adjacent to the Plaintiff’s land and 35.70 square meters (hereinafter “Defendant’s existing building”) of cement and ground wood tanks, which are located adjacent to the Plaintiff’s land.

B. The Plaintiff newly constructed the 4th floor building on the ground of the Plaintiff’s land and completed the registration of ownership preservation on April 8, 1994. At the time, the Plaintiff installed a fence to mark the boundary (hereinafter “Plaintiff’s wall”) along the line connecting the 12,13 marks of the attached appraisal, which is the vicinity of the boundary between the Plaintiff’s land and the Defendant’s land.

C. Meanwhile, the Defendant Existing Building was located at a distance from the fence installed by the Plaintiff. However, F extended the roof to the wall installed by using the Plaintiff’s fence as the outer wall while performing the extended construction of the Defendant Existing Building.

As a result, the expanded building (hereinafter “Defendant's On-site building”: Provided, That the alteration registration following the expansion was not completed), including the wall installed by the Plaintiff, was made up to the section 2.6 square meters (hereinafter “section 2.6 square meters”) among the Plaintiff’s land, which connected each point of the attached appraisal No. 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 5, and 9 among the Plaintiff’s land.

In this regard, the plaintiff and F had conflict and, in particular, the F installed the window by drilling the wall installed by the plaintiff around August 2002, and the plaintiff filed a civil petition with the competent authority and restored it to its original state. D.

As to the defendant's land and the defendant's existing building, ① ownership transfer registration was completed on December 6, 2005, ② ownership transfer registration was completed on October 8, 2013 after the filing of the lawsuit in this case.

At present, the defendant's existing building is being used as a beauty room.

[Ground of recognition] A without any dispute, each entry of Gap evidence 1 through 5 (including paper numbers), Gap evidence 6, each video of No. 1 through 3 (including paper numbers), and the court of first instance.