1. The defendant points out to the plaintiff and each point of the attached Form 1, 2, 4, 5, 7, 6, and 1 among the buildings listed in the attached Table list.

1. Determination as to the cause of claim

A. On October 17, 2011, the Plaintiff completed the registration of ownership transfer with respect to the buildings listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “the instant building”); around October 2015, the Defendant, among the instant buildings, filed a request for the Defendant to provide certification of the content of the instant building including (a) No. 1, 2, 4, 5, 7, 6, and 1 in sequence connected each point of (a) and No. 19.45 square meters in the attached sheet (2), No. 3,4, 6, 5, and 3 in sequence connected each point of (b) and No. 2.34 square meters in the attached sheet (b), No. 8, 9, 11, 10, and 8; hereinafter “the instant building”); and (c) No. 9.32 square meters in order to remodel the outer wall of the instant building and to extend the rooftop work room; or (c) the Plaintiff’s submission of the entire portion of the instant building to the Defendant.

B. According to the above facts, the defendant, the possessor of the part in the dispute in this case, is obligated to deliver the part in the dispute in this case to the plaintiff, the owner of the part in the dispute in this case, unless there are special circumstances.

2. The defendant's argument as to the defendant's assertion is alleged to the purport that since the defendant agreed to occupy and use the part of the dispute of this case between the plaintiff and the plaintiff even after the completion of construction, the defendant has the right to possess it. However, there is no evidence to acknowledge the defendant's above fact

3. Conclusion, the plaintiff's claim of this case is justified.