1. The plaintiff (Counterclaim defendant)'s main claim is dismissed.

2. The Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) is Seoul.

In full view of the facts of recognition as to the cause of the claim, Gap 1-1, 1-2, 2-1, 2-2, 3-1-3, 4-1, 4-2, and Eul 1's respective entries and Eul 2's results of measurement and appraisal with respect to video and the Korea Intellectual Property Corporation in this Court, the plaintiff purchased Seongdong-gu, Seoul, 3-95.9 square meters (hereinafter "the plaintiff's land") on February 29, 198, and completed the registration of ownership transfer on March 3, 198. The plaintiff 1-1, Seongdong-gu, 1-2, 2-1, 2-2, 3-1, 3-1, 3-3, 4-1, 4-2, and 5, 1999, 2, 3-1, 3-1, 3-2, 199, 1, 3-1, 4-1 and 5-1, 97, 1 and 4.

2. It can be recognized that the same fact as a part of five square meters (hereinafter referred to as “influent part”).

Judgment

According to the above facts of recognition, the defendant is obliged to remove the ground of the defendant's ownership located on the ground of the intrusion against the plaintiff who exercises the right to claim the exclusion of disturbance based on ownership and deliver the above part of the crime.

In addition, the defendant has a duty to return unjust enrichment equivalent to the above rent, as he gains profit equivalent to the rent while using and earning profit from the above part of the crime without any legal ground and thereby causes damages to the plaintiff equivalent to the same amount.

The defendant's assertion on the defendant's defense and counterclaim contains the period of possession of all occupants, and the defendant's intent to own the plaintiff's land for twenty (20) years after March 3, 198 and March 3, 2008, to conduct peace and performance of the above part of the crime.