1. The monetary payment portion of the judgment of the court of first instance against the defendant shall be as follows, upon a request for change at the trial.

1. Scope of trial of the political party after remand;

A. In the instant case where only the Defendant appealed, the court of the trial before remanded the case, where only the Defendant had filed an appeal, ordered the Defendant to remove the subject matter and claim for restitution of unjust enrichment, the court rendered a judgment of the first instance court with respect to the removal of each of the above parts of “divities” portion of the ground wooden section 1, 32, 31, 30, 36, 35, 37, 34, 37, 38, 38, 39, 38, 40, 83, 84, 75, 76, 77, 78, 79, 80, 81, 82, 83, 10, 84, in sequence, connected the Defendant with each of the above parts of “divities” in the instant case’s land to the Defendant (hereinafter “the instant land”) and the entire part of the land owned by the Plaintiff in succession with each of the above parts “the land owned by the Plaintiff 26.”

B. The Defendant appealed only with respect to the return of unjust enrichment in the judgment before remanding the case, and the Supreme Court reversed the part of return of unjust enrichment in the judgment before remanding the case and remanded it to this court.

C. Ultimately, among the Plaintiff’s claims against the Defendant, removal of a building and request for the transfer of land were separately determined, and this Court’s judgment is limited to the claim against the Defendant for return of unjust enrichment related to the land of this case.

2. In full view of the Gap evidence Nos. 1-1, 2, 2-2, and 2-1, 2-3, and 3-1-1 of the evidence No. 3-2, and the result of the survey and appraisal by the appraiser N of the first instance trial, and the purport of the whole pleadings as to the cause of the claim, the defendant can recognize the fact that he owns the house of this case on the land of this case owned by the plaintiff from April 23, 2009, and occupies and uses the land of this case. According to the above facts of recognition, the defendant gains profit from the use of the land of this case while occupying and using the land of this case, and thereby causes damage equivalent to the amount to the plaintiff.

As such, this part of the plaintiff's E shall be the same.