1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Basic facts

A. The land of this case (hereinafter “instant land”) was originally owned D, and D sold it to the Defendant on March 5, 2005, and completed the registration of ownership transfer on March 16, 2005.

On December 15, 2005, the Plaintiff concluded a contract with the Defendant to purchase the instant land in KRW 140,000,000, and around that time, paid the above purchase price to the Defendant and received the instant land from the Defendant, and completed the registration of ownership transfer on December 16, 2005.

B. After that, the Plaintiff newly constructed a house on the instant land on November 2009.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 2, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Judgment on the plaintiff's claim

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion is adjacent to the Gyeonggi-gun E land, and F, the owner of the adjoining land, filed a lawsuit against the Plaintiff for the removal of a stone shed on the land affected by the Plaintiff on the ground that the stone axis of the instant land was 80 square meters away from F’s land, and at the same time the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit for the return of unjust enrichment equivalent to the rent during the boundary, on the ground that the stone axis of the instant land was 80 square meters away from F’s land.

Accordingly, the Plaintiff agreed to remove stone embankments that invaded F with F and pay KRW 2,00,000 as unjust enrichment.

However, the Plaintiff only purchased the instant land from the Defendant and did not know at all that time the boundary of the adjoining land was invaded, and there was no notification from the Defendant. As such, the Plaintiff suffered damages by constructing a stone shed and selling it to the Plaintiff due to the Defendant’s error in the boundary surveying.

Therefore, the Defendant should pay to the Plaintiff KRW 32,004,00,000, which was used by the Plaintiff at the cost of removing and reconstructing the stone embankments adjacent to the Plaintiff, and KRW 2,000,000, which was paid by the Plaintiff to F with unjust enrichment.

B. First of all, determination.