1. The defendant shall be the plaintiff.

(a) Of the real estate listed in the separate sheet No. 1, each point is indicated in the annexed sheet No. 5,6,7,8,5;

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Plaintiff, as a person who implements the project of the construction of national highwaysB bypass road for the area of the relevant part, including the real estate listed in the separate sheet Nos. 1 and 3, acquired each ownership of each real estate listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “each real estate of this case”) on the ground of acquiring consultation on the land for public use.

B. The defendant is entitled to the real estate listed in the annexed sheet No. 1 (hereinafter "the land of this case").

No. 1-B of the Disposition No. 1 on the real estate listed in the separate sheet No. 3 (hereinafter “instant land”).

Each of the instant items, including the above warehouses and plastic greenhouses, shall be installed in each of the instant items (hereinafter referred to as “each of the instant items”), and the possession of each of the instant real estate.

[Grounds for recognition] The descriptions of Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 5, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. According to the above facts, the defendant is obligated to remove the obstacles of this case and deliver each of the real estate of this case to the plaintiff, since it is determined that the defendant constructed each obstacles of this case on the land of this case, and occupied each of the real estate of this case, thereby infringing on the plaintiff's ownership of each of the real estate of this case.

B. As to this, the defendant asserted that he cannot respond to the plaintiff's claim until he receives compensation for business loss and compensation for relocation expenses from the plaintiff.

On the other hand, the issue of whether the defendant is eligible for each of the above compensation should be disputed through an administrative litigation, separate from the case. In full view of the purport of the entire arguments in the above evidence, the defendant had already filed an administrative litigation against the plaintiff, but it is recognized that the defendant did not receive the judgment that the defendant is eligible for each of the above compensation. Thus, the defendant's assertion that the defendant cannot respond to the plaintiff's claim until the plaintiff received the above compensation is greater.