1. Defendant B:

(a) Ordering each point of Attached 2, 4, and 9 among the real estate listed in the Attached 1 List.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On February 5, 2010, the Plaintiff completed the registration of ownership transfer under the name of the Plaintiff on March 4, 2010 on the real estate listed in the separate sheet No. 1 (hereinafter “instant real estate”).

B. On September 4, 2006, Defendant B completed the registration of ownership transfer on D factory site, 1,283 square meters and its ground factory building adjacent to the instant real estate, and installed a block fence of 14.2 meters in length (hereinafter “the instant wall”) on the part line connected with each point of 4,9, in sequence, among the instant real estate, from around that time, up to 14.2 meters, and occupied and used the 13 square meters in length (hereinafter “the 3rd part”) connected each point of 4,5,6,9, and 4 attached Form 2 as Defendant B’s factory site. Of the instant real estate, Defendant B used the 12 square meters in length (hereinafter “the 2nd part”) connected each point of 6,7,8,9, and 6 square meters in sequence with the 6,7,9, and the 2nd part among the instant real estate as Defendant B’s factory site.

C. On June 18, 2004, Defendant C completed the registration of ownership transfer of E factory site E 1,395 square meters and its ground factory building in the vicinity of the instant real estate, and thereafter, Defendant C uses 1 and 2 parts as the passage of the factory owned by Defendant C as the passage of the factory.

[Ground of recognition] In the absence of dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 6, Eul evidence Nos. 1, Eul evidence Nos. 1 and Eul evidence Nos. 1 through 4, the result of this court’s verification, the result of appraiser F’s survey and appraisal, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. According to the above facts of recognition 1 on the removal of fences, request for delivery of land, and request for return of unjust enrichment against Defendant B, Defendant B removed the fence of this case to the Plaintiff who exercises the right to claim removal of disturbance as the owner, unless there is no legitimate title to possess the cream part on the ship, delivered the cream part on the ship, and made unjust enrichment due to possession and use of the cream part on the ship