1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. Each land indicated in the attached list of the Plaintiff’s assertion was owned by the Plaintiff since October 16, 2012. The Defendant owned one plastic house and one house on the ground indicated in the attached list, as stated in the purport of the claim, and possessed and used the relevant part of the land. As such, the Defendant removed one plastic house and one house as indicated in the purport of claim to the Plaintiff, and transferred the relevant part of the land, and sought the return of unjust enrichment from October 16, 2012 to the time of removal of the said building and delivery of the land, or from the date of loss of ownership of each land indicated in the attached list of the Plaintiff.

2. The judgment of removal of a building is a factual act that constitutes a final disposition of ownership, and thus, in principle, the right to remove the building is vested only in the owner (in principle, the titleholder of the registration).

As an exception, the right to remove and dispose of a building, such as purchasing and possessing the building from the former owner, etc., within the scope of the right, has also the right to remove and dispose of the building legally or in fact.

(2) In light of the aforementioned legal principles, the Plaintiff’s claim on a different premise is dismissed. The Plaintiff’s claim on a different premise is dismissed as it is difficult to accept. The Plaintiff’s claim on a different premise is without merit. The Plaintiff’s claim on a different premise is dismissed. The Plaintiff’s claim on a different premise is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.