1. The part concerning the claim for confirmation of legal superficies among the instant lawsuits is dismissed.

2. Each balance of the plaintiffs (appointed parties).

1. Basic facts

A. The Defendant is the owner of each real estate listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “Defendant-owned land”), and the Plaintiff (Appointed Party) and the remaining designated parties (hereinafter collectively referred to as “Plaintiff(Appointed Party”) are co-owners who own each 1/3 shares of C and its ground buildings, respectively, at the time of two weeks in the vicinity of the Defendant-owned land.

B. Of the land owned by the Defendant, there is a well-owned ground water pipe (line well, hereinafter “instant well-owned ground”) installed by E, which was the previous owner, on the land set forth in the attached Table No. 1 of the attached Table No. 1 (hereinafter “instant land”).

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

2. Determination as to the plaintiff (appointed party)'s assertion

A. The summary of the Plaintiff (Appointed Party)’s assertion ① The former owner of the instant land sold the instant land to the Defendant without including it in the subject matter of sale and purchase, while selling the instant land, E continuously used it by himself/herself, and sold to the Plaintiff (Appointed Party) on January 29, 2010, when selling both the land and the building on the instant land to the Plaintiff (Appointed Party) and selling the land and the building on the instant land to the Plaintiff (Appointed Party).

Therefore, the land of this case and the land of this case are originally owned by E, and the land of this case were sold to the defendant, and since the land of this case was sold to the plaintiff (appointed party) and each owner of the land and its ground was different. Thus, the plaintiff (Appointed party) et al. acquired legal superficies under the customary law for the purpose of owning the land of this case among the land owned by the defendant and the land of this case.

② Nevertheless, the Defendant, while disputing the statutory superficies by the Plaintiff (Appointed Party) on February 2, 2012, damaged the power equipment of the instant conduit while damaging the power equipment of the instant police officer, and damaged the control equipment of the instant police officer on May 2013.