1. The plaintiff's respective claims against the defendant (appointed party) and the designated parties are all dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be.

1. Basic facts

A. On December 30, 1981, the Plaintiff completed the registration of ownership transfer for the reason of donation from the deceased H (hereinafter “the deceased”) who was the original owner of the real estate listed in the separate sheet No. 1 (hereinafter “instant land”).

B. The real estate listed in Paragraph 2 of the attached Table No. 2 on the ground of the instant land (hereinafter “instant building”) was unregistered as the deceased’s ownership. However, upon the deceased’s death in around 1989, the Plaintiff, I, the Defendant (Appointed Party), and the appointed parties [the appointed parties inherited the shares of J due to the deceased’s death with the deceased’s heir, and the Defendant (Appointed Party) and the appointed parties (hereinafter collectively referred to as the “Defendant (Appointed Party”)] completed the registration of preservation of ownership [public land: Plaintiff 49/203; Defendant (Appointed Party); Defendant 35/203; Nonparty 35/203; Nonparty 15/203; Nonparty 15/203; G, 103/203; G, 103/204/203; and 203/4/203 of the appointed parties]; and

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1-1 to 6, Gap evidence 2, 3, and 5, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination on the defense prior to the merits

A. Although the Plaintiff asserted by the Defendant (Appointed Party) changed the original purport of the claim seeking a return of unjust enrichment equivalent to the land rent through the claim and the application for change of the cause of the claim on July 9, 2015 and July 16, 2015 to the removal of the building of this case and the land of this case, and subsequently changed to the exchange with seeking the implementation of the procedure for registration of cancellation of registration of preservation of ownership of the building of this case, the Plaintiff stated that he/she will maintain both the claim for return of unjust enrichment, removal of the building and delivery of the land through the preparatory document dated September 14, 2015. The claim for return of unjust enrichment, removal of the building and delivery of the land were withdrawn through the exchange of the claim and excluded from the existing subject matter of lawsuit.

As such, the claim for return of unjust enrichment and removal of buildings among the lawsuits in this case.