1. The defendant shall deliver to the plaintiff the building listed in the attached list No. 2.

2. The plaintiff's remaining claims are dismissed.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff purchased each real estate listed in the separate sheet on September 9, 2015 from Nonparty C and completed the registration of ownership transfer on the same day.

B. As of the closing date of pleadings, the Defendant occupies the building listed in the attached Table No. 2 (hereinafter “instant building”).

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 3, purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. According to the facts of the above recognition as to the request for delivery of a building, the defendant occupied the building of this case and thereby hindering the exercise of the plaintiff's ownership. Thus, the defendant is obliged to deliver the above building to the plaintiff.

B. The Plaintiff requested the Defendant to transfer the land listed in paragraph (1) of the attached Table No. 1 (hereinafter “instant land”). However, since a building cannot exist regardless of its site under social norms, the land which became the site for the building shall be deemed to be possessed by the owner of the building. In this case, even if the owner of the building does not actually occupy the building or its site, it shall be deemed to possess the land for the purpose of owning the building (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2002Da57935, Nov. 13, 2003). Thus, the Plaintiff’s assertion on this part, premised on the premise that the Defendant occupied the instant land, is without merit.

3. In conclusion, the plaintiff's claim of this case is justified within the above scope of recognition, and the remaining claims are dismissed as they are without merit.