1. Of [Attachment 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, and 13 of the [Attachment 1] Map No. 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, and

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On August 23, 2016, the Plaintiff is the owner who completed the registration of ownership transfer on the ground of sale on August 16, 2016, with respect to the land 793 square meters (hereinafter “instant land”).

B. On December 19, 190, the Defendant constructed a new building on attached Table 2 (hereinafter referred to as “instant building”) on the surface of 105 square meters on the portion of “(105 square meters” in the attached Table 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 19, 20, 21, and 13 among the instant land and the instant land adjacent to the said land, which was connected in sequence to each of the items in the attached Table 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, and 13, and completed the registration of ownership preservation on the instant building on January 31, 191, and thereafter thereafter, owns the instant building.

[Ground of recognition] A without dispute, entry of Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 3 (including branch numbers if there are branch numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply), entry of Eul evidence Nos. 1 through 4, the result of the request for surveying and appraisal to appraiser E by this court, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. According to the above facts of determination as to the cause of the claim, the defendant, barring special circumstances, has the duty to remove the part which was located on the land in the dispute of this case among the buildings of this case and deliver the land in the dispute of this case to the plaintiff.

3. Judgment on the defendant's assertion

A. The summary of the argument is that the defendant purchased 400,000 won from the networkF on April 1990 and newly constructed the building on both the land in the dispute of this case and on the ground of 198 square meters on December 19, 190, which was owned by the defendant, for 20 years or more until now, the acquisition by prescription for possession of the land in the dispute of this case was completed by occupying the land in the dispute of this case in peace and openly and openly for 20 years or more. Thus, the defendant cannot respond to the plaintiff's request due to a legitimate right to possess and use the land in the dispute of this case.

B. We examine the judgment, and the defendant newly constructed the building of this case on December 19, 190, and on January 31, 1991, the registration of ownership preservation on the building of this case.