beta
Text
1. The plaintiff
A. Defendant B, among the real estate listed in attached Tables 1 and 2, indicated in attached Tables 2, 3, 4, 9, and 2.
Reasons
1. Facts of recognition;
A. On October 17, 2000, the Plaintiff completed the registration of ownership transfer in the name of the Plaintiff on November 28, 200 with respect to the land size of Jongno-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government D large 21.2 square meters.
B. On November 28, 2000, Jongno-gu Seoul Jongno-gu D major 21.2 square meters was divided into 10.4 square meters in the Gu E-gi, such as 10.8 square meters in Jongno-gu Seoul, Jongno-gu D major 10.8 square meters, and the Jongno-gu Seoul D major 10.8 square meters in the attached list was divided into 1 and 2 land (hereinafter “instant land”) in the attached list on February 18, 2009.
C. A part of the G-owned buildings adjacent to the land Nos. 1 and 2 of Jongno-gu Seoul, Jongno-gu, Seoul, on which part of the G-owned buildings owned by the Plaintiff was invaded on the instant land Nos. 1 and 2, and the part on the ship connected with each point of 0.8 square meters in sequence among the land Nos. 1 and 2 of this case (hereinafter “the part on the instant crime No. 1”) and 9, 4, 5, 11, 10, and 9 of the Map No. 2, and the part on the part (D-1) 1.4 square meters in the ship (hereinafter “the part on the instant crime No. 2”) connected each point of 6, 7, 10, 11, and 6 of the attached drawing No. 2 among the real estate No. 1 of this case and the real estate No. 2 of this case (hereinafter “the part on the instant crime”) in sequence connected each point of 6, 7, 10, and 6.
The Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against G and G, the owner of the building that intrudes on the instant land Nos. 1 and 2, and filed a lawsuit against H, who leased the part of the instant land No. 1, the Seoul Central District Court (Seoul Central District Court 201Gadan438480, and filed a lawsuit against G, etc., and the said court “G to the Plaintiff” removed the instant building Nos. 1, 2, and 2, 2, and 3 square meters of the roof structure of the block structure on the ground of land No. 1, 2, and 3, delivered each of the said sites, and Defendant H was handed down (hereinafter “previous judgment”). The said judgment became final and conclusive.
After the judgment of this case, Defendant B leased the part regarding the first and second crimes in this case from G, and Defendant C committed the third crimes in this case from G.