1. The judgment of the first instance, including the claims of plaintiffs A, B, and D added at the trial, shall be modified as follows:

1. Facts of recognition;

A. Plaintiffs A and B, as married couple, operate a refined landing point and restaurant in the name of “I” (hereinafter “I”), and Plaintiff C and D, as married couple, operate a restaurant in the name of “K cafeteria” in J.

Plaintiff

A The land and building owner of the H, the building owner, and the Plaintiff B, the I restaurant business operator of the I restaurant, Plaintiff B, the I restaurant business operator of the I restaurant, Plaintiff D, the I restaurant business operator, and the Plaintiff C, the owner of the land and the building and the owner of the building and the name of the K cafeteria, the plaintiff C, the business operator of the I restaurant.

B. On February 25, 1993, Defendant E acquired ownership of the above L, forest land, 766 square meters (hereinafter “instant land”) by auction.

In fact, the instant land was provided for a long time for the passage of the general public traveling along the territory of a sandy president. On February 22, 2007, Taean-gun acquired 613/766 shares of the instant land on the road section 613 square meters, but the remainder was occupied and used by the Plaintiff, etc. in a way that intrudes the boundary of the land owned by Plaintiff A and D.

Accordingly, Defendant E demanded that Plaintiff A, D, etc. purchase the land of the part of the crime (19 square meters in case of Plaintiff A, Plaintiff C, and 44 square meters in case of Plaintiff A, Plaintiff C, and Plaintiff D) but the Plaintiffs did not comply with the aforementioned request.

(2) Accordingly, on August 6, 2004, Defendant E filed a lawsuit against Plaintiff A, C, etc. for the removal of buildings and delivery of land (Seoul District Court Seosan Branch Court Decision 2004Da7691). Defendant E was rendered a favorable judgment on February 12, 2007.

Accordingly, although the Plaintiff, etc. appealed, the appeal was dismissed on October 25, 2007 ( Daejeon District Court 2007Na4125), and the appeal was dismissed on January 4, 2008.

(Supreme Court Decision 2007Da78760). C.

After winning Defendant E’s winning of the case, Defendant E applied for substitute execution with executive title on March 14, 2008 (Seosan Branch of the Daejeon District Court M), and the written decision accepting it was served on March 19, 2008 for Plaintiff C, and on March 21, 2008 for Plaintiff A.

(2) Plaintiff A.