1. All appeals filed by the plaintiffs are dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal are assessed against the Plaintiffs.

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

1. The reasons for the court’s explanation as to this case are as follows. The remaining evidence, other than the evidence presented in the “additional Part” of the evidence submitted in the court of first instance, is added to insufficient evidence. As such, the court of first instance cites it as it is in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

【Additional Part】 The Plaintiffs asserted that, as at the time of the survey on October 17, 1995, K participated in the land adjacent to the instant case and became aware of the fact that the instant housing was in violation of the “B” portion, K’s possession is an owner of the land adjacent to the instant case, and accordingly, the Defendant’s possession is also the owner of the land adjacent to the instant case.

At the beginning of the possession, a person who occupies another person's land adjacent to his own land with knowledge of a part of his own land became aware that the land is not the land owned by himself later.

Even if the existence of a mutual dispute is revealed as a result of the cadastral survey or as a result, such circumstance alone does not change the possession into the possession of the owner.

(See Supreme Court Decision 2001Da5913 Decided May 29, 2001, and Supreme Court Decision 2013Da43666, 43673 Decided September 13, 201, etc.). First, as a result of the boundary survey on October 17, 1995, as to whether K knew of the fact that the instant housing infringed on the land of “B”, it is insufficient to recognize the instant housing solely on the basis of the health unit, A4, 5, and 6 evidence, and the fact-finding results with regard to the testimony of K witnesses of the Party and the fact-finding with regard to the Vice-Governor of the Korea Land Information Corporation in Busan, Busan, and there is no other evidence to deem otherwise.

In addition, even if K participated in the survey on October 17, 1995 and became aware of the fact that the instant housing was invaded by “B” portion, as alleged by the Plaintiff, K purchases the adjacent land and the instant housing from J on May 16, 191.