1. From March 13, 2015, the Defendant lost the Plaintiff’s ownership as to the land specified in attached Table 1 from March 13, 2015 to the Plaintiff.

1. Determination on the cause of the claim

A. The facts of recognition ① The Plaintiff is the owner who was awarded a successful bid on March 13, 2015 in the procedure for compulsory auction conducted as a result of the provisional seizure from November 11, 2005 by the provisional seizure as of March 13, 2015 (hereinafter “instant land”).

② Around May 2014, the Defendant is the owner of the building, who newly constructed a building listed in attached Table 2 (hereinafter “instant building”) on the ground of the instant land and completed registration of ownership preservation on June 30, 2014.

③ The amount equivalent to the rent for the instant land is KRW 33,500 per month.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, entry of Gap evidence 1 and 2, the result of the rent appraisal by this court, the purport of the whole pleadings

B. According to the above facts of determination, unless there is a special possessory right, the Defendant is obligated to remove the instant building to the Plaintiff, deliver the instant land, and pay the amount at the rate of KRW 33,500 per month from March 13, 2015, which is the date of acquiring the Plaintiff’s ownership due to the return of unjust enrichment from the possession of the instant land, from March 13, 2015 to the date of loss of the Plaintiff’s ownership or the date of termination of the Defendant’

2. The following circumstances are revealed in Gap evidence Nos. 4, 7, Eul evidence Nos. 3 and 4 regarding the defendant's right of abuse of rights, namely, ① the building of this case was newly constructed around May 2014 by the defendant and for which one year has not passed since the plaintiff was awarded a successful bid for the land of this case; ② the appraisal price of this case at the time when the plaintiff was awarded a successful bid for the land of this case is 8,040,000 won (which is the same as the basic price calculated through the rent appraisal by this court); ② the appraisal price at the building exceeds 87,125,000 won; ③ the appraisal price at the building exceeds 10 times the value of the land; ③ the plaintiff was awarded a successful bid for the land of this case at 25,100,000 won from the appraisal price to 3 times the appraisal price of this case. In light of the size and location of the land of this case and the details of development.