The part of the judgment of the first instance, including the conjunctive claim added by this court, against the Defendants is as follows.

1. The reasoning of the court of first instance concerning this case is as follows: “The plaintiff asserts to the effect that “the plaintiff shall claim transfer of ownership and delivery with payment, if the defense by the above Defendants against the two buildings is accepted”; “the part of the plaintiff’s claim for removal” from the last 6th to the first 7th 12th 6th 12th “the result of appraisal by each appraiser”; “the fact that the brief was delivered to the plaintiff on September 19, 2018 by the same day is clearly stated in the record, and that the document was delivered to the plaintiff on the same day.” The plaintiff’s claim for removal of the building of this case cannot be seen as being included in “the plaintiff’s claim for removal of the building of this case” and “the plaintiff’s claim for removal of the building of this case cannot be seen as being included in “the plaintiff’s claim for removal of the building of this case by the second 20th 9th 196th 7th 2018.”

2. Conclusion, the Plaintiff’s primary claim against the Defendants, excluding the claim for removal of the instant two buildings, and the conjunctive claim against the instant two buildings, shall be accepted on the ground of its reasoning, and the claim for removal of the instant two buildings among the primary claim shall be dismissed on the ground of its ground.