1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. The plaintiff's assertion is the sectional owner of the real estate listed in the separate sheet. The building of this case is constructed on the fifth floor rooftop, which is the section for common use of the real estate listed in the separate sheet, and becomes the object of independent ownership. Unregistered building of this case, C newly built and acquired its ownership at the original time, but it occupied part of the rooftop and interferes with the ownership of the commercial building and thus it should be removed. Under such circumstances, the defendant illegally occupies the building of this case. Thus, the defendant is seeking the removal of the building

[Plaintiff may describe the Defendant as “D” on the ground of the claim. However, the Plaintiff has already filed a lawsuit against D seeking removal of the building of this case under the court 2016Kadan14123 (Evidence B-2). Thus, the Defendant, such as the Plaintiff’s statement of the party concerned, is deemed to be “B,” and as the removal of the building constitutes a final disposition of ownership, in principle, the Plaintiff has the right to remove the building only to its owner (registered). However, a person who purchases and occupies the building is not yet registered as the owner on the registry.

Even if a landowner is in a position to legally or factually dispose of a building in possession within the scope of his/her right, so a landowner who is illegally occupied due to the construction of the building can seek removal from the building occupant in the position above.

(Supreme Court Decision 88Meu4017 delivered on September 27, 1988). Regarding the instant case, the health care unit: (a) the Plaintiff merely asserts that “the Defendant is using the instant building at the same time as one’s own possession; or (b) the Plaintiff was an illegal occupant who did not have the status of assignee who acquired the instant building from C who acquired it at the original time.” (c) On the other hand, the Defendant demanded removal in accordance with the aforementioned legal doctrine.