Of the 66m2 in Dongjak-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, the Defendant indicated the annexed drawing -, 9, 17, 18, 19, 7, and 8.

1. Basic facts

A. On May 30, 1997, the Plaintiff completed the registration of transfer of ownership on the ground of sale on May 27, 1997, with respect to the land of Dongjak-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, Seoul (hereinafter “Plaintiff”) and the housing building of two stories above that ground (hereinafter “Plaintiff building”).

B. The Plaintiff’s land is adjacent to the Dongjak-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government B large 66m2 (hereinafter “Defendant’s land”).

(See Attached Form 3).

Plaintiff

A building is a building the registration of ownership preservation of which was completed on June 30, 1975, and the registration of ownership transfer was completed on May 27, 1997 due to inheritance of September 7, 1992, and on May 30, 1997, the Plaintiff completed the registration of ownership transfer as above.

(The same details of the change in land ownership is also the same).

Plaintiff

Part of a building (such as a wall, gate, etc.) is a building that intrudes on the defendant's land.

Of the Defendant’s land, the part on which the Plaintiff’s building was invadedd and constructed is 5 square meters in the ship, which connects each point of the following, in sequence, 8, 9, 17, 18, 19, 7, 22 square meters in the ship, and 5 square meters in drawings, such as 8, 9, 9, 17, 18, 19, 7, 22, 20, 20, 20, 21, 22, 1, 22, 3, 4, 5, and 5 (hereinafter referred to as the “instant dispute”).

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 3, Eul evidence Nos. 1 through 5 (including each number; hereinafter the same shall apply) and images, the result of the survey and appraisal conducted by appraiser F, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. According to the evidence and the facts of recognition prior to the determination on the cause of the claim, the plaintiff owned the plaintiff's building from May 27, 1997, which was the date of acquiring the ownership of the plaintiff's building, and possessed the part of the dispute of this case, which is the site of the plaintiff's building. The above possession of the plaintiff's dispute of this case is presumed to have been carried out in peace and public performance with the intention of possession. Thus, the defendant shall, barring special circumstances, conduct the part of the dispute of this case among the land of this case