1. The part concerning the claim for the removal of drainage pipes and the restoration of the land in this case shall be dismissed.

2...

A principal lawsuit and a counterclaim shall be deemed simultaneously.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff completed the registration of ownership transfer on April 27, 1994 with respect to C Forest land 494 square meters (hereinafter “instant forest land”).

B. Around March 2013, the Defendant operating an orchard in the area of 9,502 square meters (hereinafter “instant land”) located in Seosan-si, Seosan-si, a neighboring to the instant C forest (hereinafter “D”) located in the area of 3,4,50 square meters on the ground (b) section 347 square meters on the part inside the instant forest, which connects each of the items of (b) 3,4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, and 3,47 square meters in sequence among the instant forest land (hereinafter “instant land”).

[Ground of recognition] Class A 2, 3, 4, Eul evidence Nos. 1 (including paper numbers), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination on the main claim

A. The Plaintiff asserts that the Defendant’s appraisal among the instant C forest land is obstructing the Plaintiff’s exercise of ownership by installing a steel network at 12 meters in the ship connected with each point of 10,11,12, and 3 meters in sequence, and thus, the Plaintiff’s claim for the removal of the said steel network and the restoration of the land to its original state is examined ex officio. As such, the Plaintiff’s claim for the removal of the said steel network and the restoration of the land to its original state is examined.

In civil procedure, the purport of the claim must be clearly specified so that it can be confirmed in itself by clarifying the contents and scope of the claim, and it shall be unlawful if the purport of the claim is not specified or unclear. Among the main claim in this case, the removal of the wire network and the restoration of land to its original state shall not be deemed to have been specified to the extent that it does not interfere with the performance of the defendant's obligations or compulsory execution.

Therefore, the part of the main office of this case requesting the removal of steel nets and the restoration of land to its original state is unlawful.

B. According to the judgment on the claim for the collection of trees and the delivery of land (1) above, the defendant shall, unless there are special circumstances to the plaintiff, hold the part of the case (2) owned by the plaintiff.