1. All appeals filed by the defendant and the defendant are dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal are assessed against the defendant and the intervenor.

1. Basic facts

A. On June 24, 2015, the Plaintiff acquired ownership by winning a successful bid for each of the buildings listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “each of the instant buildings”) owned by A in the public sale procedure under the National Tax Collection Act.

B. On July 15, 2015, the Defendant Daehan purchased the land for B,793 square meters (hereinafter “instant land”) at the time of Pakistan where the said building is located, and completed the registration of ownership transfer on July 20, 2015.

C. On July 17, 2015, the Defendant number intervenor entered into a trust agreement with the Mugunghwa Trust Co., Ltd. and the instant land, and completed the registration of ownership transfer based on the trust on July 20, 2015. However, on May 4, 2016, the Defendant number intervenor again completed the registration of ownership transfer under the name of Defendant number intervenor.

At present, each building of this case is jointly possessed by the defendant and the intervenor of the defendant (hereinafter referred to as the "defendant, etc.").

[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence 1 to 6 (including virtual number), Eul evidence 2, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. According to the above facts finding as to the cause of the claim, the Defendant, the possessor of each of the buildings of this case, has the duty to deliver each of the above buildings to the Plaintiff, the owner, unless there are special circumstances.

B. The defendant et al. asserted that since the plaintiff failed to obtain legal superficies, etc. to occupy the land of this case in relation to each of the building of this case, the defendant et al. asserted that the defendant et al. should remove each of the building of this case upon the plaintiff's request, and therefore,

However, even if the Plaintiff was unable to obtain statutory superficies and the Defendant, the owner of the instant land, was liable to remove the instant building, the possession of the Defendant, etc. on the instant building owned by the Plaintiff can be immediately justified.