1. The defendant shall appoint the plaintiff (appointed party) and the appointed party:

(a) remove the real estate listed in the separate sheet, Gwangju City.

1. Basic facts

A. On August 5, 2015, the Plaintiff and the designated parties acquired the ownership by winning a successful bid for the relevant land in the procedure of the auction of real estate rent D with Seongbuk-gu Seoul District Court (hereinafter “instant land”).

B. On September 21, 2015, the Defendant completed the registration of ownership transfer on the real estate listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant building”) due to sale, and possessed the instant land while owning the instant building.

C. From August 5, 2015 to August 4, 2016, the term rent of the instant land is KRW 4,211,190 per annum, and the rent after August 5, 2016 is KRW 4,383,786 per annum.

[Ground of recognition] The fact that there is no dispute, Gap evidence 1, Gap evidence 2, the result of the appraisal commission to appraiser E, the purport of whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. According to the facts of the determination as to the cause of the claim, the Defendant, the occupant of the instant land, removed the instant building constructed on the ground of the instant land to the Plaintiff and the Selection, barring any special circumstances, and delivers the instant land. The Defendant, the occupant of the instant land, transferred the instant land to the Plaintiff, and KRW 4,727,320 (==3,670,408 won + KRW 4,211,190 + KRW 319/366, and KRW 319/366; hereinafter the same shall apply) equivalent to the rent that the Defendant acquired the ownership of the instant building from September 21, 2015 to October 31, 2016.

() 1,056,912 won (i.e., KRW 4,383,786 x 88/365) and unjust enrichment equivalent to the rent in proportion to KRW 4,383,786 per annum from November 1, 2016 to the date the building of this case was removed or the date the Plaintiff and the designated parties lose their ownership.

B. The Defendant’s assertion and judgment that the former owner of the instant building acquired the statutory superficies under customary law for the instant building with respect to the instant land. Since the Defendant acquired the statutory superficies under customary law, there is a legitimate right to possess the instant land for the instant building, and the Defendant seeks to remove the instant building.