1. The defendant shall be the plaintiff.

A. On the 15th floor of the stairs room, 15. Dangsung-gun, Chungcheongnam-gun, and D-ground reinforced concrete structure.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Plaintiff was awarded a successful bid for each of the said lands in the voluntary auction procedure with regard to the area of 581 square meters and 79 square meters in Hong-gun, Hong-gun, Hong-gun, Hong-gun, and D Forest land, and completed each registration of ownership transfer on February 20, 2018.

B. Around December 2012, the Defendant obtained permission related to construction of two buildings on each of the above land and contracted construction to E.

After that, the construction has not been completed and the construction has been suspended, and the minimum columns, roof and main walls at the time have been completed.

(c) There are 15.12 square meters in the stairs room and 161.49 square meters in the stairs room of 15.12 square meters in the first floor of reinforced concrete building, which is a building not completed on the land of Chungcheongnam-gun, Chungcheongnam-gun, and D, and multi-household housing of 15.39 square meters in the stairs room of 15.39 square meters in the first floor of reinforced concrete building, which is a building not completed on the ground of Chungcheong-gun C, and multi-household housing of 159.37 square meters in the second floor.

【Ground of recognition】 Evidence No. 1-1, 2, Evidence No. 5, Evidence No. 6-1 through 9, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. According to the facts found in the judgment as to the cause of the claim, the Defendant, the owner of each of the above buildings, obtained benefits equivalent to the rent and suffered damages equivalent to the Plaintiff by occupying each of the above buildings on each of the above lands. Thus, barring special circumstances, the Defendant is obligated to remove the above buildings to the Plaintiff, deliver each of the above land parts, and return unjust enrichment equivalent to the rent.

3. Judgment on the defense

A. The defendant defenses that the above land and each of the above buildings were owned by the defendant, but the ownership of the land was changed by auction by the mortgage established on each of the above lands, and the defendant has the legal superficies for each of the above buildings.

B. Legal superficies under Article 366 of the Civil Act is recognized only when a building exists on the land subject to mortgage from the time of establishing a mortgage, and the mortgage is established on the land without a building.