1. The defendant shall be the plaintiff.

A. Of the area of 793 square meters in Ulsan-gun, Ulsan-gun, an appraisal map in attached Form 11, 14, 15, 9, 10, 11 shall each be marked.

1. In full view of Gap evidence No. 1-2, Gap evidence No. 1-2, and Gap evidence No. 2, and the result of the on-site inspection by this court, the result of this court's request for measurement and appraisal of the previous branch offices of the Korea Cadastral Survey and appraisal, as well as the purport of the entire pleadings, the defendant acquired ownership of D land adjacent to Ulsan-gun, Ulsan-gun, Ulsan-gun, 793 square meters (hereinafter "the plaintiff-owned land"), owned by the plaintiff on October 13, 2008, and newly constructed a new house by acquiring ownership of D land. The defendant, during that process, has 8 square meters of land owned by the plaintiff (hereinafter "the part of the affected land in this case"), thereby piling up the fence, installed the water-supply facilities and CCTV electric poles, and occupied it by planting the ornamental water, etc.

Therefore, barring special circumstances, the Defendant is obligated to remove all facilities, such as fences, installed on the land at the flooded part of the instant case, and deliver the land at the flooded part to the Plaintiff.

2. Judgment on the defendant's assertion

A. The Defendant alleged to the effect that the survey file drawings, which form the basis of the survey appraisal, do not coincide with the cadastral map and installed a fence after confirming a boundary at the time of new construction of a house, the Defendant did not infringe on the Plaintiff’s land. However, the evidence alone submitted by the Defendant is insufficient to recognize any error in the result of the request for survey appraisal by the court, and no other evidence exists.

B. The Defendant asserted the prescriptive acquisition regarding the access road to the said house. However, in light of the purport of the assertion, the Defendant appears to have asserted for the prescriptive acquisition of the passage area, which is different from the land of the instant infringed part. As such, the legitimacy of the assertion is irrelevant to the legitimacy of the instant claim.

C. Therefore, the defendant's above assertion is without merit.

3. In conclusion, the Defendant is obligated to deliver to the Plaintiff all facilities, such as fences, installed on the land located in the affected part of the instant case, and deliver the affected part of the land to the Plaintiff.