1. The Defendant’s KRW 31,376,80 for the Plaintiff and the Plaintiff’s 5% per annum from January 12, 2018 to February 2, 2021.

1. In around 1960, Plaintiff’s father D purchased a house with 350 square meters and a house with unregistered land (hereinafter “Plaintiff’s house”).

D From the business year, among the area of 274 square meters adjacent to the above Gwangjubuk-gu E site, D has occupied a fence surrounding the attached Table 1, 2, 3, 17, 16, 13, 14, 15, and 1, among the area of 274 square meters adjacent to the above Gwangju Northern-gu 274 square meters, among the area of 1, 2, 3, 17, 16, 13, 14, 14, 13, 21, 22, 23, and 18, the part of the dispute of this case related to the wall of this case (hereinafter “the dispute of this case”).

D On December 30, 1978, after completing the registration for the preservation of ownership of land, ASEAN sold the above land to ASEAN, and on February 21, 1987, after completing the registration for the preservation of ownership of the above building on the above land, ASEAN donated the Plaintiff’s housing to ASEAN and completed the registration for the transfer of ownership.

On February 3, 1989, the Defendant completed the registration of transfer of ownership on February 28, 1989 with respect to the area of 119 square meters in Gwangju North-gu, including the instant dispute part, for sale and purchase. On December 12, 2017, the Defendant sold the said area to H (hereinafter “H”) with limited liability, and completed the registration of transfer of ownership on January 12, 2018.

The Plaintiff: (a) against the Defendant and H, etc. in Gwangju District Court Decision 2018Ga group 517631, 2019Ga group 535667 (Consolidation); (b) the period of prescription has expired by having the Plaintiff occupy the dispute part of the instant case in peace and openly for at least 20 years as owned by the Plaintiff; (c) even though the Defendant knew of the completion of the prescription period, even though having knowledge of the completion of the Plaintiff’s acquisition, sold the dispute part of the instant case to H and completed the registration of transfer of ownership, thereby making the Plaintiff be omitted from performing the obligation of transfer of ownership to H, thereby making it impossible for H actively

The claim is that the ownership of the dispute in the future H is cancelled by the previous class, and that of this case due to the completion of the prescription period of acquisition by the defendant on February 28, 2009.