1. The Defendant-Counterclaim Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) indicated in the attached Form No. 1, 2, 3, 4, among the real estate listed in the attached Table No. 1, 2, 3, and 4.

The main lawsuit and counterclaim are also examined.

1. On April 14, 2015, the Plaintiffs purchased “F 2305 square meters” (hereinafter “the instant land”) from E and completed the registration of ownership transfer on April 30, 2015.

The Defendant, among the instant land, installs and occupies a plastic house on the ground of 280 square meters in the part (A) which connects each point of the attached drawing Nos. 1, 2, 3, 4, and 1 in sequence, among the instant land.

[Reasons for Recognition] Uncontentious Facts, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 4, Eul evidence No. 2, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination on the main claim

A. According to the above facts, the Defendant asserted that the Plaintiff, without any title, was obstructing the exercise of the Plaintiff’s ownership by installing a vinyl house on the instant land without any title, and that the Defendant interfered with the exercise of the Plaintiff’s ownership by occupying the instant land by installing and occupying a vinyl house on the ground indicated in the Annex (A) drawing out of the instant land. Therefore, the Defendant, who is a lessee of the instant land, was obligated to remove the said vinyl house and deliver the relevant part of the land. 2) The Defendant, on June 16, 2007, leased 150 square meters (495 square meters) out of the instant land from E on 2009, when he leased the instant land from 200 square meters (60 square meters), around 200 (660 square meters more, 2012. 70,000 won per annum from 2015 to 706,000 won per annum, claiming that the Plaintiff was not obligated to purchase the instant land after 2015.

Therefore, it is not sufficient to recognize that a lease contract between the defendant and the former owner E is concluded only with the statement of No. 1, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it.