1. The defendant shall be the plaintiff.

(a) Of the land listed in the separate sheet, each point of the attached sheet Nos. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, and 1.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On February 10, 2017, the Plaintiff completed the registration of ownership transfer on the land listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant land”).

B. On November 16, 1981, the Defendant completed the registration of ownership transfer in the Defendant’s future on the attached list (hereinafter “instant building”) constructed on the land of 251 square meters in Seopo-si, Seopo-si adjacent to the instant land.

C. Of the instant building, the part of the first floor is 10 square meters inboard connected with each point of the instant land indicated in the annexed drawing Nos. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, and 1. Of the instant building, the two floors of the instant building were built with 5 square meters inboard connected each point of the said drawing Nos. 2, 3, 4, 5, and 2 in sequence.

【Ground of recognition】 The fact that there is no dispute, entry of Gap 1 through 4, the result of this court’s request for surveying and appraisal for the head of Seogpo-spa branch of the Korea Land Information Corporation, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. According to the above facts, barring any special circumstance, the Defendant, without any legal ground, is obligated to remove the part of the building which was built in the above part of the building of this case and to deliver 10 square meters of the above part of the land of this case to the Plaintiff, and to return unjust enrichment equivalent to the rent, since the Defendant occupied and used 10 square meters of the above part of the land of this case on the land of this case owned by the Plaintiff through the part of 10 square meters of land of this case constructed on the land of this case on the land of 5 square meters of land of this case.

B. As to this, the Defendant had resided in the existing building for about 38 years without recognizing the fact that the instant land was invaded since the completion of the registration of ownership transfer on November 16, 1981, and had not been aware of the fact about the instant building. Accordingly, the Plaintiff’s immediate removal and request for transfer of the instant building is unfair, since the removal and repair cost would be considerable to the extent that the damaged part would be removed.