1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Basic facts

A. On December 12, 2014, the Plaintiff: (a) awarded a contract for a land of 864 square meters (hereinafter “instant land”) in the Gangwon-do Crossing-gun C prior to a voluntary auction process; and (b) completed the registration of ownership transfer under the Plaintiff’s name on December 26, 201.

B. Meanwhile, on the other hand, the defendant completed the registration of ownership transfer on the ground of a sales contract dated October 1, 1974 with respect to the building of this case on the ground of the part of this case among the land of this case on May 2, 1985.

(Grounds for recognition: Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 and 2, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination:

A. According to the above facts of recognition as to the plaintiff's cause of action, the defendant owned the building of this case and possessed the land of this case owned by the plaintiff. Thus, the defendant is obligated to remove the above building and deliver the above part of the land to the plaintiff, barring special circumstances.

B. The Defendant’s assertion and its determination (1) around October 1973, the Defendant’s primary and conjunctive assertion (1) constructed the instant building with the consent of the former owner of the instant land. The Defendant, around October 1, 1974 from D, paid to the son F with respect to the purchase of the instant building, E and the donation of the instant land. From around 2011, the Defendant paid to G some of the purchase of the said land from F.

Therefore, around the other hand, the defendant acquired by prescription the superficies on the land of this case, and at least the above relationship is a lease relationship, and the defendant, by filing a lawsuit in this case, exercises the right to demand the purchase of the ground property against the plaintiff who rejected the renewal of the lease. Thus, the plaintiff cannot comply with the plaintiff's claim until he is paid

(2) We examine the Defendant’s claim for the prescriptive acquisition of primary superficies, and find that D or the Defendant occupied the instant building as a person with superficies, or concluded a superficies contract with the former owner.