1.The judgment of the first instance, including a claim added in the first instance as a preliminary one, shall be amended as follows:

1. Facts of recognition;

A. Defendant C is the representative director of Defendant B Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant Company”), and Defendant D was in a de facto marital relationship with Defendant C.

B. From March 1, 2012 to the closing date of the instant pleadings, Defendant C and Defendant C occupied and used the movable property listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “the instant vinyl”) from March 1, 2012 to the closing date of the instant pleadings, and form a tent with a view to astronomical benefit.

The instant vinyl is installed on the ground of several parcels, such as Seopoposi E, which is not owned by the Plaintiff and the Defendants.

C. On February 4, 2013, the Plaintiff acquired the ownership of the instant vinyl house.

The sum of rents from February 5, 2013 to February 4, 2015 regarding the instant vinyl is KRW 29,105,808, and the rent from February 5, 2015 is KRW 14,263,664 annually.

E. The Defendants, from March 2015 to November 2016, paid on behalf of the Plaintiff the total amount of KRW 5,957,646, as to other vinyl houses owned by the Plaintiff adjacent to the instant vinyl houses.

(1) The court of first instance held that the confession of the above facts was revoked on the date of the second pleading, but there is no evidence to acknowledge that the confession was contrary to the truth and due to mistake, and thus, the revocation of confession is not effective). 【The fact that there is no dispute over the ground of recognition, the entry of evidence Nos. 1, 2 and 3 (including the number of pages; hereinafter the same shall apply), the result of the appraisal by the court of first instance, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Claims for extradition and preliminary claims, among the primary claims;

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion without title possessed the instant vinyl owned by the Plaintiff. As such, ① the Defendants primarily have to deliver the instant vinyl to the Plaintiff, and ② the Defendants should not prevent the Plaintiff from removing or removing the instant vinyl.

B. The Plaintiff is the owner of the instant vinyl, and the Defendant Company and the Plaintiff.