1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. The Plaintiff’s assertion asserts that the Plaintiff is obligated to remove the parts of the building located on the part of the ship, deliver the portion of the land to the Plaintiff, and return the rent equivalent to the amount of unjust enrichment from the possession and use of the land on the part of the ship, since the Plaintiff, in the order of the indication of the attached drawing No. 1, 23, 4 and 1 among the land owned by the Defendant, owned by the Plaintiff, the menter block block block string roof, which is located on the part of 158 square meters of C, C, the entire 158 square meters of land (hereinafter “instant land”) and D, and that the Plaintiff has a duty to return the rent equivalent

2. In the event that a building constructed on another’s land is unregistered and the ownership of the building is infringed on by that person’s land, the obligation to remove the building is a person in a position to legally and factually dispose of the building;

According to the appraiser's appraisal result, it is recognized that a part of the land of this case exists, but it is not sufficient to recognize the fact solely with the health care unit and evidence No. 2 as to whether the defendant is a person in a position to dispose of the building legally and actually. The plaintiff's above assertion is without merit, since there is no other evidence to acknowledge it.

In full view of the statements in Eul evidence Nos. 1, 2, and 3 and the purport of the entire argument as a result of the fact-finding by the court, buildings on the land of this case on the land of this case seems to have been unregistered by the defendant, in sequence transfer E to E, and have the authority to dispose of the buildings to F. Therefore, the plaintiff's above assertion is without merit without examining the remaining points.

3. The plaintiff's claim for the conclusion is dismissed on the ground that it is without merit.