1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

3. The text of the judgment of the court of first instance is set forth.

Basic Facts

On May 28, 2015, the Plaintiff is the owner who purchased Asan City C large 268 square meters (hereinafter “instant land”) and completed the registration of transfer of ownership by purchasing it in the auction procedure of D's real estate rent for D's real estate located in the Daejeon District Court.

On the ground of the instant land, each point of which is indicated in the separate drawing Nos. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 14, 15, 16, 17, and 1 among the instant land, is located on the ground of the instant land, and approximately 86.4 square meters of the instant land and the same drawing Nos. 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 14, and 9 are located in the ship, which connects each point of which is located on the ground of the instant land, and the Defendant occupies the instant housing and warehouse as of the date of closing argument of the instant case.

On October 29, 1968, the network E completed the registration of initial ownership relating to the housing of this case located on the F of Asan City before the split-off.

Afterwards, the part on which the instant house is located among the land in the ASEAN City F before subdivision was divided into the instant land on July 11, 2012.

The deceased E died in around 2001, and there are G as his heir.

[Reasons for Recognition] In a case where there is no dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 5, Eul evidence Nos. 1 and 3, video Nos. 7, assertion of the purport of the whole pleadings, and judgment-related legal principles are not equipped with the right to use land for the existence of the building, and the owner of the land is entitled to request the owner of the building to remove the building and deliver its site, if a person other than the owner of the building occupies the building, the landowner may not implement the removal of the building, etc. unless the building occupation is removed.

Therefore, the land ownership is deemed to be hindered in the smooth realization of the land by the above possession. Therefore, the land owner may request the possessor of the building to withdraw from the building as an exclusion of interference based on his own ownership.

Supreme Court Decision 201.10