1. The Defendant’s KRW 4,633,425 as well as the annual rate of KRW 5% from August 14, 2013 to April 12, 2016 to the Plaintiff.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff purchased the instant land and newly built a building on September 1, 2006 (hereinafter “instant land”) from Asan City, D, E, F, G, and H land from B on September 1, 2006

(2) On September 17, 2004, B purchased 545,000,000 won for transaction and completed the registration of ownership transfer. Meanwhile, B obtained a construction permit for Class II neighborhood living facilities with the size of 1st underground floor and 5th ground level on the ASEAN City, E, and G ground on September 17, 2004.

On December 8, 2005, the Plaintiff acquired all the construction permit rights including the use of the above land from B, and reported the change of the name of the owner on December 12, 2005.

3) Afterwards, the Plaintiff is a building of 234.9 square meters and 234.9 square meters and 234.9 square meters and 2 stories on the second-class neighborhood living facilities with three floors of reinforced concrete structure (refinite) structure (refinite) and 34.9 square meters (hereinafter “instant building”).

In November 23, 2011, registration of ownership preservation was made.

B. As of September 15, 2014, the current status of the instant land being used for the site and road, etc. as of September 15, 2014 is as shown in the annexed sheet and the following table.

F G CD H EI

C. The fixed-term fees for the portion of “Ma” portion in the ship connected in sequence of each point indicated in the table 22, 20, 19, 9, and 22, and for the portion of “MaMa” portion in the ship connected in order to each point of 18, 17, 16, 7, 8, and 18, are as follows:

CD E F GH / without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 2, 15, Eul evidence 5, 6, 9 (including paper numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply), the result of the survey and appraisal conducted with the appraiser J, the result of the appraisal conducted with the appraiser K

2. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion is as follows: (a) the Defendant’s unlawful act, namely, (b) the water supply and sewerage pipe is laid underground on the instant land owned by the Plaintiff without permission; and (c) the Plaintiff occupied only the urban planning line without permission; (b) the value of the instant building was reduced by lowering G.Ll when granting a building permit on the instant building, at least 1.5m lower than that of the L national highways; and (c) the Plaintiff erred in height of the Mandones.