1. The defendant shall give order to the plaintiff each point of 1, 2, 3, and 1 of the attached reference sheet among the land for factory B 206 square meters in Chungcheong City.

1. Fact-finding;

A. The Plaintiff is the owner of B 206m2 (hereinafter “instant land”).

B. Around November 23, 2011, the General Food and Natural Complex Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Nonindicted Company”) newly built a lightweight structure and other framed structures on the ground of the instant land and adjacent Chungcheong-si C, Chungcheong-si, the relevant land and adjacent thereto (hereinafter “instant building”).

C. Of the instant building, the part on “A” in paragraph (1) of the Disposition No. 1 of this case is located on the ground of the instant land, where the area of “A” is located on the ground of 4 square meters in a light metal-frame structure outer wall of the light-frame structure, and a water treatment room of the board of the board of the board of the board of the wastewater (attached Form No. 4 square meters (the result of a survey on the current status of cadastral records), and the cement structure of “B” in the cement structure of the cement structure of the cement structure (attached

On August 19, 2014, the Defendant acquired ownership by winning a successful bid for the instant building in a voluntary auction procedure.

[Ground of recognition] The facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1-2, Gap evidence 1-2, and Eul evidence 2, the result of the request for surveying and appraisal to the Chungcheong branch office of the Korea Intellectual Property Corporation, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. According to the above facts of recognition as to the cause of the claim, unless there are other special circumstances, the defendant is obligated to remove the part of the building in this case owned by the plaintiff among the buildings in this case owned by the defendant, and deliver the part of the land to the plaintiff, as described in paragraph (1) of this Article.

B. (1) The summary of the Defendant’s argument is that the Plaintiff consented to the construction of the instant building on the ground of the instant land to the non-party company, thus seeking partial removal of the instant building against the Defendant, who acquired ownership of the instant building, constitutes a violation of the principle of trust and good faith and constitutes an abuse of rights.

(2) Considering that evidence Nos. 3, 1, 2, and 3 were written in addition to the whole purport of the pleadings, the Plaintiff’s construction of the instant building at the time of Nonparty Company’s construction.