1. The defendant removes the building indicated in the attached list 2 on the ground of the land listed in the attached list No. 1 to the plaintiff.

1. According to the overall purport of the statement and pleading by Gap's evidence Nos. 1 through 3 (including virtual numbers) as to the cause of the claim, the plaintiff may recognize the fact that the plaintiff completed the registration of ownership transfer on August 24, 2015 as to the land indicated in the separate sheet No. 1 (hereinafter "the instant land") due to sale from May 18, 2015, and the defendant owns a building listed in the separate sheet No. 2 (hereinafter "the instant building") on the ground of the instant land.

According to the above facts, the defendant is obligated to remove the building of this case on the ground of the land of this case and deliver the land of this case to the plaintiff.

2. Judgment on the defendant's assertion

A. The defendant's assertion that the defendant constructed the building of this case with the consent of use from B, who was the owner of the land of this case, and owned it without any special agreement on the removal of the building. Even if the land and the building of this case are owned by another person due to changes in ownership, the above building is not a special agreement to remove the building. Thus, the defendant acquired legal superficies under the customary law on the land of this case.

Since the defendant as a superficiary has the right to claim the plaintiff to purchase the building of this case at a reasonable price, the plaintiff is obligated to purchase the building of this case and is also obligated to pay compensation to the defendant.

Even if not,

Even if the Plaintiff did not operate a regional housing association project and the auction procedure for the land of this case is underway, the Plaintiff’s claim of this case cannot be allowed as an abuse of rights, since it has no practical benefit in exercising the right to request land extradition and is in violation

B. The circumstance alleged by the Defendant alone does not mean that the Defendant acquires legal superficies under the customary law on the instant land, but does not have the obligation to purchase the instant building or pay compensation to the Plaintiff.

In addition, the plaintiff's objection.