1. Of the judgments of the first instance court, the part against the defendant in excess of the following portions shall be revoked and that part shall be revoked.

Of the judgment of the first instance court on March 10, 2016, the part on the claim for cancellation of the surcharge of KRW 725,080 was excluded from the scope of the judgment of the court.

Details of the disposition

In order to build B and extend C to C in Seoul Metropolitan Government, Jongno-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government (hereinafter referred to as the "Cro") E large 36 square meters was divided into E large 27.9 square meters (the expropriated in Seoul Special Metropolitan City) and F large 8.1 square meters (hereinafter referred to as the "instant land") around August 9, 1976.

D according to the above division, D has completed the outer wall construction by cutting the buildings located on the existing E-land according to the boundary line surveyed by Seoul Special Metropolitan City.

The building that completed the outer wall construction is referred to as "the building of this case".

(2) The Plaintiff purchased the instant land and buildings from D around February 1, 1989. Meanwhile, the Seoul Special Metropolitan City expropriated G 18.2 square meters (60.2 square meters) and H 6.2 square meters (20.5 square meters) around February 9, 1977. Each of the said lands was changed to a road on May 20, 197, and the land category was changed to a road on June 13, 1994, and was combined with the land of 23.1 square meters on June 13, 1994 and E 92.2 square meters on March 31, 2010, and was combined with the land of 349 square meters on J. 349 square meters on J. 362.6 square meters on J.

A. A.

However, as a result of the new cadastral survey conducted by the Defendant, the building of this case does not exceed 13.1m2 of the road of this case.

On November 9, 2012, the Plaintiff imposed indemnity for unauthorized occupation of the occupation portion of this case on the Plaintiff on November 9, 2012.

The Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the cancellation of the above disposition of imposition of indemnity under the court 2013Gudan24788 on the ground that the Plaintiff did not occupy the occupation part of the instant case with the Plaintiff’s intentional negligence, and the Plaintiff voluntarily withdrawn the said lawsuit as the conciliation recommendation was accepted on April 23, 2015 to change the disposition to the amount equivalent to the occupation charges.