1. The Defendant’s succeeding intervenor each point of the attached Form 1, 2, 3, 4, and 1 among the land size of 936 square meters prior to D, when residing in the Plaintiff.

1. Determination on the cause of the claim

A. According to the following facts: (a) the Plaintiff purchased the land indicated in paragraph (1) of this case (hereinafter “instant land”) from E on May 18, 2010 and completed the registration of ownership transfer on June 3, 2010; (b) the instant land is constructed with 165 square meters in a small agricultural products collection center (165 square meters in a register: 165 square meters in a single-class warehouse of steel framed Standgel, Gagwon, etc.; hereinafter “the instant warehouse”); (c) the instant warehouse is the owner from September 24, 1996 to September 24, 196 under the building registry, and the ownership registration was completed in the name of the Intervenor (i) on June 16, 2013 when the instant lawsuit was pending.

B. According to the above facts, the Defendant’s successor, as the owner of the instant warehouse, occupied the instant land owned by the Plaintiff and infringed on the Plaintiff’s ownership, barring any special circumstances, and thus, the Defendant’s successor removed the instant warehouse constructed on the ground specified in the Annex (A) among the instant land, and has a duty to deliver the said part of the land to the Plaintiff.

2. Judgment on the defenses, etc. of the defendant (Withdrawal) and the defendant succeeding intervenor

A. The Defendant (Withdrawal) and the Defendant’s successor intervenor. Since the warehouse of this case was constructed under the name of the Defendant (Withdrawal) who was the previous owner of the land at the time with the permission of E, the previous owner of the land of this case, the warehouse of this case had the right to use the land of this case. However, there is no evidence to acknowledge otherwise, the defenses by the Defendant (Withdrawal)

[Y] Even if E permitted the use of the instant land at the time of the construction of the warehouse of this case, the Defendant (ex officio and the Defendant’s successor) (the Plaintiff, the owner of the instant land).