1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. Basic facts

(1) The Plaintiff acquired ownership on October 11, 2005 through the annexation of the Plaintiff’s land and the Plaintiff’s land of KRW 239 square meters (hereinafter “Plaintiff’s land”) in Geum-gu, Busan (hereinafter “Seoul”) and completed the registration of ownership preservation on March 4, 201 by constructing two houses of five stories on that ground (hereinafter “Plaintiff’s building”).

B. On June 3, 2014, the Defendant acquired ownership of E large 204 square meters adjacent to the Plaintiff’s land (hereinafter “Defendant’s land”) and two detached houses of reinforced concrete brick structure sloping roof (hereinafter “Defendant’s building”).

Secondly, the Defendant’s land acquired the ownership on March 19, 190 and constructed the Defendant’s building on that ground, and obtained the approval on November 19, 190, and completed the ownership preservation registration on March 9, 191. The Defendant’s land died and succeeded to G, H, and I around October 31, 2005. On the death of the F, H and I succeeded to this on May 14, 2007, and the Defendant purchased the Defendant’s land and the Defendant’s building from H and I.

m. At present, part of the purification tank owned by the Defendant is laid underground on the ground of section 0.14 square meters in the section of item (a) (a) of the separate sheet among the Plaintiff’s land, which connects each point of 0.14 square meters in sequence, and part of the purification tank owned by the Defendant is laid underground on the ground of 0.69 square meters (hereinafter referred to as “land in dispute of this case,” hereinafter in item (a), (b) and each land collectively referred to as “land in dispute of this case”).

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1-1-4, Gap evidence 2-1, 2-2, Eul evidence 5, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. The plaintiff's assertion ① The defendant, without any title, occupies and uses the land in the dispute of this case by laying the purification facility and the drainage pipe under the ground of the plaintiff's land C, without permission. Thus, the above purification facility and the drainage pipe were mined, and deliver the land in the dispute of this case.