1. The plaintiff (Counterclaim defendant)'s main claim is dismissed.

2. The Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) is Gulri-si C. to the Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff).

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Plaintiff purchased from D on July 9, 1998 the E Forest 298 square meters (hereinafter “one parcel of land”) and completed the registration of ownership transfer on August 31, 1998. The Defendant purchased on November 5, 2003 the land of Gu, Gu, Gu, Dong-si, which is adjacent to F on November 5, 2003, 361 square meters of Gu, G forest 361 square meters (the land at issue was registered as registration conversion on December 12, 2012, and the land at issue was 361 square meters of Gu, Gu, Gu, Si, Si, Si, Do. 361 square meters (the land at issue was hereinafter “2 land”) and completed the registration of ownership transfer on November 8, 2003.

B. Meanwhile, while the boundary on the cadastral map does not coincide with the boundary on the cadastral map because the land No. 1 and No. 2 were cadastral non-conformitys, the Plaintiff, around March 2008, connected the boundary of the land No. 3, 5, 7, 12, 13, and 8 in sequence with each point of the annexed drawing No. 3, 5, 7, 12, 13, and 8 (hereinafter “the boundary of the Plaintiff’s assertion”), and installed brins on the ground.

C. After December 2012, the competent cadastral authority conducted a cadastral survey, etc. in order to eliminate the cadastral inconsistencys of the said H District, and subsequently confirmed the boundary line of the land Nos. 1 and 2 as the line connecting each point of the attached Form Nos. 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, and 9 in sequence.

However, around July 2013, the Defendant changed part of the bridge installed by the Plaintiff on the ground that the boundary line of the land Nos. 1 and 2 connects each point of the annexed drawing Nos. 3, 5, 7, 12, and 8 (it seems to have changed the line installed on the line connecting each point of the annexed drawing Nos. 12, 13, and 8 among the above bridges installed by the Plaintiff, in sequence, with the line connecting each point of the annexed drawing Nos. 12, 8, 13, 12, and 7 successively connected each point of the annexed drawing Nos. 7, 8, 13, 12, and 7). In accordance with the aforementioned part of the bridge, the Defendant planted trees on the inner side of the bridge, as seen above, on the part of the ship connecting each point of the aforementioned bridges installed by the Plaintiff.

Grounds for Recognition: Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 4, 27, and 28; the result of the survey and appraisal conducted by appraiser I; the appraiser I of this Court.