1. The Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) against the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant)

A. The attached Form 1. A mark 1. (1) of the 1,643 square meters of forest land C, Gyeongdong-gun, Gyeongbuk-do.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On September 11, 2006, the land was divided into KRW 1,643 square meters of Gyeongbuk-do C forest (hereinafter “instant land”) and KRW 1,898 square meters of D forest land (hereinafter “D land before subdivision”). As to D land before subdivision, the registration of ownership transfer in the Plaintiff’s name was completed as of May 17, 1989.

B. The Defendant is an organization consisting of residents living in the Gyeonglbuk-gun E, and whose representative is this Chapter.

C. Around 1963, the Defendant newly constructed a community hall of 10 square meters and 1 other community halls (the title section of the certificate of the real estate registration shall be 10 square meters and 7,11,10, and 100 square meters (hereinafter “the instant building”) on the ground, such as the land D before subdivision and the Fluh-gun, the Gluh-gun, and the 1963. The part of the instant building among the instant building is located on the ground (a) part (a) of the instant building connected each of the points in sequence of 1 through 7, 11, 10, and 1, and 37 square meters (hereinafter “the part of the instant land”) among the instant land, which is connected with each of the items indicated in the attached drawing(2) marks (2), 7, 8, 13, 12, 11, and 6.

[Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap 1, 2, 4, 5 evidence, Eul 1 and 3 evidence, the result of the request for appraisal by the Korea Land Information Corporation, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. As to the principal lawsuit

A. The plaintiff asserts that the defendant owned the building of this case and occupied and used the part of the land of this case as the site, but did not have any title to possess it. The plaintiff asserts that the defendant had no title to remove the part of the building of this case, located on the ground of ownership, against the defendant, and sought removal of the relevant part of the building of this case and transfer of the part of the land of this case from the land of this case, and that the amount of unjust enrichment equivalent to the rent calculated from January 29, 2007 as to the part of the land of this case.