1. The Plaintiff and Sejong Special Self-Governing City M-Governing City is one of 14,777 square meters;

A. Defendant B shall indicate the attached appraisal sheet No. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and 5.

1. Determination as to the cause of claim

A. The Plaintiff completed the registration of ownership transfer on October 16, 1993 with respect to the land of Sejong Special Self-Governing City M-Governing City M 14,77 square meters (hereinafter “instant land”). The Defendants, as described in paragraph (1) above, possess a building or possess a garden in the manner that owns a building or occupies the relevant land as indicated in paragraph (1) above on the instant land, shall be recognized in accordance with the respective entry (including the serial number) in Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 5, and the result of the appraisal commission to the head of the Sejong Special Self-Governing City Special Self-Governing City, the result of the appraisal commission to

B. According to the above facts, since the Defendants owned a building on the ground of the instant land or occupied the relevant land in a way that a garden is opened, the Defendants are obligated to remove the relevant building to the Plaintiff, the owner of the instant land, and deliver the land corresponding to each occupied part, unless there are other special circumstances.

2. Judgment on the defendants' assertion

A. Defendant B’s assertion and judgment at the time of 1982, Defendant B leased the land from the Plaintiff’s mother-friendly N, the Plaintiff, who was the owner of the instant land, and paid rent to the Plaintiff after the Plaintiff’s death. As such, Defendant B asserted that Defendant B had a legitimate tenant the right to possess the instant land, but the evidence submitted by Defendant B alone is insufficient to acknowledge the said assertion, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge this otherwise. Thus, Defendant B’s assertion is without merit.

B. Defendant C’s assertion and judgment around September 201, 201, purchased a building from the building owner and the manager of the relevant part of the land, which were constructed in the part indicated in the annexed drawing(s) and paid at the end of three million US annually as land usage fees. As such, Defendant C was entitled to the right to occupy and use the relevant land by inheritance fromO, or exercising the right to purchase under Article 285 of the Civil Act.