1. The defendant

(a) Appendix 17, 37, 38, 20, 27, 28, 29, 29, 30, 30, 30, referring to the attached sheet among each land listed in the attached list;

1. Basic facts - The Plaintiff acquired ownership of each land listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “each land of this case”) around August 10, 207.

- The defendant prior to the plaintiff's acquisition of ownership of each of the lands of this case, the defendant 1-A of this case on each of the lands of this case.

Each structure (hereinafter referred to as the “each structure of this case”) and the order No. 1-B.

All of the perennial trees (hereinafter referred to as "the trees of this case") as stated in the subsection are owned.

- Of the land listed in attached Table 1 (hereinafter referred to as “land 1”), the area occupied by the Defendant by owning each of the instant structures and trees as above shall be 1868 square meters, and the rent for the said occupied area shall be as shown in attached Table 1.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap 1 evidence, result of survey appraisal, result of survey appraisal, purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. (1) According to the above facts of recognition, the defendant without title possessed each of the structures and trees of this case on the land of this case owned by the plaintiff and possessed the land of this case. Thus, the plaintiff is obligated to remove the each of the structures of this case, remove the trees of this case, collect the trees of this case and deliver the site to the plaintiff.

(2) In addition, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff the amount equivalent to the rent from September 1, 2007 to the completion date of delivery of the instant tree site, as sought by the Plaintiff, due to the return of unjust enrichment by occupying the land owned by the Plaintiff as seen above.

(However, as seen below, since the defendant's defense is partially reasonable, the amount of the rent shall be calculated in the judgment of the defense). (B)

(A) The summary of the Defendant’s argument (A) is as follows: ① The Defendant occupied the land of the first place and disbursed the following expenses, which led to an increase in the objective value of the land of the first place; thus, the land of the first place may be retained until the beneficial cost is paid, and even if the following expenses are beneficial costs: