All appeals against the counterclaim by the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) and incidental appeals against the principal lawsuit by the Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff).

1. The reasoning of this court’s judgment citing the judgment of the court of first instance is identical to the ground of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for the addition as follows.

[Supplementary Parts] 5. The next eight pages shall be added as follows:

In the above report, the plaintiff expressed his opinion that the reinforcement construction is inevitable on the ground of the existence of risks regardless of the instant retaining wall, and that in the research service report (Evidence A7) on the stability of retaining wall of G, an incorporated association conducted around April 2019, and the report (Evidence A8) of H, a H, a corporation constructed the instant fish strawer, it was necessary to install the instant fish strawer in order to prevent the collapse of the wall. Thus, even if the retaining wall of this case was worn off and required for the reinforcement construction, the construction of the fish strawer should be an inevitable repair method as seen below, and it is difficult to view that the installation of the instant fish strawer is not an inevitable repair method, and it is difficult to view that the installation of the instant fish strawer is not an adequate repair method other than the above report or the installation of the retaining wall of this case.

8 The last sentence shall be added to the following:

5) The Plaintiff asserts that the Defendants cannot seek removal from the Plaintiff on the ground that the fish poppy corresponds to the instant land and owned by the Defendants.

In order for any movable to be recognized as being attached to the real estate, whether the movable is attached and combined to the extent that it can not be separated without causing damage to the movable or excessive expenses.