1. The Defendant: (a) is not less than 39m2 in Seosan-si, Seosan-si;

(a) in sequence 1, 2, 8, 9, and 1 of the Annexed Drawings.

1. In full view of the purport of the argument as a result of the survey and appraisal by Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 3 and Eul evidence Nos. 2 and appraiser D with respect to the cause of the claim, the plaintiff completed the registration of ownership transfer on May 14, 2015 with respect to the land of Seosan-si C large-39§³ (hereinafter "the land of this case"). Under the order of priority among the land of this case, the part of "1" with the land of this case, which connects each point of 1, 2, 8, 9, and 1 with the indication of the annexed drawing Nos. 1, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, and 2, the land of this case, which is owned by the defendant, is constructed with three square meters of cement block building of this case on the land of this case with the indication of the annexed drawing Nos. 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 8, and 5 square meters of the land of this case, the land of this case, the defendant is entitled to recognize 1.

2. Defendant’s assertion and judgment

A. The Defendant’s assertion is difficult to exercise his right by constructing a building, etc., even if the part of the instant land possessed by the Defendant among the instant land is transferred to eight square meters from the Defendant, and the instant land is merely 39 square meters.

On the other hand, the defendant not only occupied the part occupied by the defendant for about 40 years, but also removed the building for the transfer of the occupied part, the cost of removal occurs, and the relocation of the residence occurs so as to cause serious damage.

Therefore, the plaintiff's removal of the building and request for the delivery of land should not be allowed as abuse of rights.

B. The Plaintiff’s ownership based on the instant land solely on the circumstance, such as the Plaintiff’s assertion.