1. The judgment of the court of first instance is modified as follows.

All of the plaintiff's claims are dismissed.

B. The defendant

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On June 21, 2006, the Plaintiff purchased each of the instant lands on June 21, 2006 from Nonparty C, the former owner of Nonparty C, the land listed in the attached list Nos. 1 and 2 (hereinafter collectively referred to as “each of the instant lands”), and purchased all of the buildings and trees located on each of the instant lands, and completed the registration of ownership transfer of shares in the attached list No. 480629/489460 among the land listed in the attached list No. 1 and the land listed in the attached list No. 2.

B. On the ground of each of the instant lands, the instant building exists, which is an unregistered building, without permission. The Defendant uses and benefits from the instant building until the date of closing argument.

C. On September 19, 2018, the Plaintiff sold to the Plaintiff’s Intervenor all the rights to share 480629/489460 of the land listed in the attached Table No. 1 and the land No. 2 and the building and trees on the land indicated in the attached Table No. 2, and completed the registration of ownership transfer on the said land on November 29, 2019.

On November 29, 2019, the Plaintiff prepared a deed of transfer between the Plaintiff’s succeeding Intervenor and the Plaintiff’s succeeding Intervenor and the Plaintiff’s judicial status as the Plaintiff against the Defendant, as well as the Plaintiff’s rights to the Defendant, and the rights and authority incidental thereto.

On August 14, 2020, the Plaintiff’s succeeding intervenor filed an application for intervention in succession with a certificate of assignment as of November 29, 2019 and the power of delegation delegated by the Plaintiff to notify the transfer of rights. The above application for intervention in succession reached the Defendant on August 21, 2020.

[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 10, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Scope of adjudication of this court;

A. In the first instance trial, the Plaintiff sought to deliver the instant building to the Defendant, and on the other hand, as the actual owner of the instant building around his monetary claim, the Plaintiff returned unjust enrichment equivalent to the rent due to the possession of the instant building.