1. The defendant shall be the plaintiff.

A. Of Seongbuk-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government 281m2, each point of the attached Form No. 5, 6, 7, 8, 11, and 5 shall be indicated in the attached Form No. 5, 6, 7

1. Determination on the cause of the claim

A. Comprehensively taking account of the written evidence Nos. 1 and 2 evidence, the vice governor of the Seoul Central Land Information Corporation in Seoul, and the purport of the entire pleadings as a result of an appraisal commission with respect to a dialogue appraisal corporation, the Plaintiff completed the registration of ownership transfer on October 27, 2005 with respect to the Seongbuk-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government C large-281 square meters (hereinafter “Plaintiff’s land”); the Defendant completed the registration of ownership transfer with respect to the D large-238 square meters and its ground buildings adjoining the Plaintiff’s land on February 28, 2014 (hereinafter “Defendant building”); however, the Defendant’s building is a ground building on the part of the Defendant’s land indicated in paragraph (a) of this Article, which is five square meters (hereinafter “frighted building”; and the part of the site is referred to as “frighted land”). The fact that the Plaintiff invadeds the Plaintiff’s land, which is a cause of 62,500 square meters for the area of the said bedroom.

B. According to the facts of the above recognition, the Defendant is obligated to remove the sunken building constructed on the Plaintiff’s land, deliver the sunken land to the Plaintiff, and pay the Plaintiff the sum of KRW 1,493,670 from February 28, 2014 to April 1, 2016, the Defendant’s acquisition date of ownership due to unjust enrichment equivalent to monthly rent, and KRW 69,670 from April 2, 2016 to April 2, 2016.

2. Judgment on the defendant's defense

A. The defendant's assertion that the defendant, including the possession of E, who is a former occupant, occupied land in a peaceful and public performance for at least 20 years by installing a fence from April 1987 and acquired prescription.

B. The following circumstances, which are acknowledged by comprehensively considering the descriptions and images of evidence Nos. 6, 7, and testimony of witness E, namely, the transfer of ownership to the Defendant on February 28, 2014 when E had extended part of the Defendant’s building to laundry room without permission, and the Defendant’s building on March 8, 2015: “Unauthorized extension of a store of wood / wood / wall of 6 square meters on one floor” on March 8, 2015; “one floor” on June 17, 2015.