1. The Defendant removed to the Plaintiff one-story (storage height) 49.5 square meters on the ground of 22,840 square meters of C orchard in Seopopoposi, Seopoposi.

1. The following facts are acknowledged according to the purport of Gap evidence No. 1-2 and Gap evidence No. 3 and the whole arguments.

On March 22, 1986, the Plaintiff and D purchased orchard from the Defendant, and completed the registration of ownership transfer from the Plaintiff and D Co-ownership name on March 24, 1986.

After that, on October 14, 2016, the transfer registration of shares was completed in the name of E with respect to the shares of D 1/2 among the above orchard.

Before the above sale, on the ground of the above orchard, the storage space (storage space) and the 26.91 square meters manager of the 1st floor of the blue tank were constructed, but the above manager was destroyed, and only the above warehouse (storage space) was at present.

2. According to the above findings of the determination as to the cause of the claim, upon the plaintiff's request as an act of preserving common property, the defendant is obligated to remove the above warehouse (storage) and deliver a part of the site to the plaintiff, except in extenuating circumstances.

3. The defendant, at the time of the sale and purchase of the above orchard, was in possession of the defendant, and there is no agreement between the owner of the land and the building to sell the orchard only among them, and the owner of the land and the building are different, and the building is to be removed. Thus, the defendant, if he acquired the legal superficies under customary law on the part of the warehouse site among the above orchard, cannot respond to the plaintiff's claim.

Inasmuch as the provisions on superficies under the Civil Act concerning superficies shall apply mutatis mutandis to customary statutory superficies, barring any special circumstance, the said period is the period stipulated in each subparagraph of Article 280(1) of the Civil Act pursuant to Article 281(1) of the Civil Act when the parties did not separately determine the duration of statutory superficies under customary law (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2006Da54651, Jun. 26, 2008). In this case, as alleged by the Defendant in the instant case, deeming that there was no agreement to remove the building at the time of the purchase and sale of orchard, and that there was no customary statutory superficies.