1. The defendant shall be the plaintiff.

(a) Of the area of 463 square meters in Seopopo-si, each of the following items: 1, 4, 3, 2 and 1:

1. Basic facts

A. On January 11, 1989, the Plaintiff purchased a share of 140/173 out of 572 square meters in Seopopo-si, Seopo-si, Seopo-si, Seopo-si, 572 square meters (hereinafter “C before division”), and completed the registration of ownership transfer with respect to the said share on January 12, 1989.

B. On February 1, 1989, the Plaintiff and D divided C’s land prior to the subdivision into C’s 463 square meters (hereinafter “Plaintiff’s land”) and E’s 109 square meters (hereinafter “Defendant’s land”).

On April 21, 1989, the plaintiff completed the registration of ownership transfer on the plaintiff's land, and D completed each registration of ownership transfer on the defendant's land.

C. D, at around March 1995, constructed a building on the Defendant’s land, and removed the provisional building located on the ground of 104m2 (B) in the ship (hereinafter “instant dispute land”) connected each point of Section 1, 4, 3, and 2, of the Plaintiff’s land in sequence with each point of Section 1, among the Plaintiff’s land, and occupied and used it by installing a new kncke, and sold the Defendant’s land and its ground buildings to F on May 3, 1999, and completed the registration of ownership transfer in F’s name with respect to the Defendant’s land and its ground buildings on May 10, 199.

On September 25, 2013, F sold the Defendant’s land and its ground buildings to the Defendant, and on October 24, 2013, F completed the registration of ownership transfer in the name of the Defendant on the Defendant’s land and its ground buildings.

In around 2013, the Defendant repaired the part of the ground of the instant land in the instant dispute. At present, there are structures, such as brickd and brickd stairs and dumkes on the ground of the instant dispute (hereinafter “instant structures”).

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 4 through 7, 9, Eul evidence Nos. 1, 2 and 6 (including each number), and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. According to the above facts of determination as to the cause of the claim, the defendant removed the structure of this case to the plaintiff who exercises the right to claim the removal of disturbance based on ownership as the owner of the land in the dispute in this case, unless there are special circumstances.