The Defendant, as the Plaintiff

A. Among the area of 1762m2 in Macheon-si, B, 1762m2, each point is as follows: (1) through (8) through (1), and (1).

1. Basic facts

A. On December 9, 2016, the Plaintiff acquired ownership of B large 1762 square meters and C large 3471 square meters (hereinafter “Plaintiff-owned land”).

B. Disposition No. 1-A on each land owned by the Plaintiff;

B. The unregistered houses and each household building (hereinafter “instant houses and each household building”) are constructed.

C. Since the Defendant’s father’s father’s chain D was purchased from the first architect before about 30 years, the Defendant’s residence and use of the instant house and each of the instant buildings had died before several years, and the Defendant’s residence and use.

On the other hand, the Defendant’s each land owned by the Plaintiff is subject to Disposition 1-A.

B. The portion of the site indicated in the attached Form No. 176 square meters and 50 square meters of the site in the part on the ship (A) and the part (b) part on the ship (hereinafter “the part on each of the instant site”) are occupied and used as the site of the instant housing and each of the building sites.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence 1 (including virtual number), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. As to the cause of claim

A. 1) Where the ownership of a building constructed on another’s land is infringed upon, the person obligated to remove the building is the owner of the building or the person entitled to de facto dispose of the building, if the building is not unregistered (see Supreme Court Decision 87Meu257258, Nov. 24, 1987). In light of the above legal principle, the instant case is a health care unit; the Defendant is in a position to legally de facto dispose of the instant housing and each of the instant buildings by succeeding the unregistered housing and each of the instant buildings, and thus, barring special circumstances, the Plaintiff should remove the instant housing and each of the instant building and the instant building, and deliver the parts of each of the instant site to the Plaintiff, barring special circumstances.

3) As to the Defendant’s assertion, the Defendant is not the owner of the instant house and each building, and thus, bears the duty of removal and delivery.