1. The plaintiff's appeal against the defendant B and the defendant B's appeal are dismissed, respectively.

2.In exchange for this Court.

1. The reasoning for this part of this Court is as follows: (a) the reasoning for this part is that the reasoning for the first instance judgment is the same as that for the corresponding part of the reasoning of the first instance judgment, except where the “statement” in the third part of the judgment of the first instance is cited as “statement or image”. Therefore, this part is cited in accordance with the main sentence of Article

2. Summary of the parties’ assertion

A. In the first instance court, the Plaintiff asserted that the owner of the instant house, etc. is G and submitted a written withdrawal of the lawsuit against the Defendant B, but Defendant B consented to the withdrawal of the lawsuit.

On the other hand, among the judgment of the court of first instance, the plaintiff appealed against the plaintiff against the defendant B.

Therefore, the part of the claim against Defendant B is examined based on the contents written by the Plaintiff in the complaint of this case.

On the other hand, the Plaintiff sought withdrawal from Defendant C on the premise that G independently owns the instant house, etc., but the Plaintiff claimed that Defendant C jointly succeeded to the instant house, etc. along with G, and changed the claim to seek removal of the house, etc., delivery of land, and return of unjust enrichment.

1) Defendant B, without a title, infringed on the Plaintiff’s ownership of the instant land by occupying and using the instant housing and boiler room on the instant land without a title. As such, Defendant B is obligated to remove the instant housing and boiler room and deliver the instant land to the Plaintiff. Defendant C is obligated to return unjust enrichment equivalent to the rent arising from using the instant land as the said site. (2) Defendant C acquired the ownership of the instant housing and boiler room by newly constructing K, which is the husband of Defendant C, and on January 1, 2002, K acquired the ownership of the instant housing and boiler room and died on January 1, 2002.

Defendant C possessed the instant land by owning the instant housing and boiler room on the instant land without title within the scope of the above inheritance shares. As such, Defendant C is above the Plaintiff.