Of the 1,634 square meters of forest land in Pyeongtaek-si, the Defendant has each of the following points: indication 1, 2, 12, 11, 10, 8, 7, and 1 of the attached Form.

1. According to Gap evidence No. 1 (including a land number), the result of the request for surveying and appraisal by this court, and the purport of the entire pleadings, it is recognized that the plaintiff is the owner of Pyeongtaek-si C forest land 1,634 square meters (hereinafter "the land in this case"), and the defendant is the owner of Pyeongtaek-si D-si D-619 square meters, E-ga 601 square meters, and the owner of a house on its ground that the defendant is the owner of the land in this case who is the owner of Pyeongtaek-si D-si D-619 square meters, E-ga 601 square meters and the owner of the land in this case, and that the plaintiff occupied the land in this case, which is successively connected with each point of the attached land No. 1, 2, 12, 11, 10, 8, 7, 1, among the land in this case, by installing landscaping trees

According to the above facts, according to the exercise of the plaintiff's right of exclusion of disturbance based on ownership, the defendant is obligated to deliver the part of possession of the land of this case to the plaintiff, unless there

2. As to the defendant's assertion, the defendant asserts that the land of this case is consistent with the landscape trees and boundary rocks owned by the defendant, and thus, the part of the defendant's possession among the land of this case is not obligated to deliver

However, the above reasons do not affect the obligation of the Defendant to deliver the part of the land in this case to the Plaintiff, so the Defendant’s assertion is without merit.

3. In conclusion, the plaintiff's claim of this case is reasonable, and it is so decided as per Disposition.