1. The Defendant points out each of the attached drawings indication 1, 2, 3, 4 and 1 among the real estate listed in the attached list to the Plaintiff.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On March 18, 2008, the Plaintiff purchased an unauthorized building located on the land owned by the Republic of Korea from Yongsan-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government D, E, and F, Yongsan-gu.

B. The foregoing unauthorized building was destroyed by a fire that occurred around December 16, 2016.

C. On December 2016, the Plaintiff introduced G, a construction business operator, from the Defendant, who was known to the general public, and set the construction cost of G at KRW 20,00,000, and ordered the construction of the building above each land to the public.

The Plaintiff transferred the construction cost of KRW 8,00,000,000, totaling KRW 3,000,000 on December 28, 2016, and KRW 5,000,000 on December 30, 2016, to the account in the name of H, the Plaintiff, as the above construction cost.

Upon the Defendant’s request, the Plaintiff remitted the total of KRW 16,700,000,000 to the account in the name of the Defendant, which is the representative director, from January 27, 2017, to the account in the name of the Defendant, and KRW 5,000,000 on February 15, 2017, and KRW 70,000 on March 23, 2017, and KRW 16,70,000 on April 16, 2017.

E. Around January 2017, real estate listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant unauthorized building”) was newly constructed on the land above, and the Defendant occupies and uses the attached sheet No. 1, 2, 3, 4, and 28 square meters in the ship connected each point of the said real estate, among the said real estate, (hereinafter “instant unauthorized building”).

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 16, purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. According to the above facts of determination as to the cause of the claim, it is reasonable to view that the owner of the building without permission of this case is the Plaintiff. Thus, barring special circumstances, the Defendant is obligated to deliver the portion of the possession of this case to the Plaintiff as a removal of interference

B. The Defendant’s assertion 1 as to the Defendant’s assertion reveals that a fire occurred from the Plaintiff, and opens a fire site along with the Plaintiff, and sit in a fire station investigation, etc., the Defendant returned to resolving the problem.

During that period, the plaintiff reflects the construction price to the defendant.