1. Revocation of a judgment of the first instance;

2. For the plaintiffs:

A. Defendant C is a building listed in Attachment 1 List 1.

Facts of recognition

Plaintiff

With respect to the land listed in Section 2 of the List of Real Estate Attached to Attached Table 1 (hereinafter “Plaintiff’s land”), the ownership transfer registration has been completed on September 6, 1994 on the ground of inheritance due to the consultation and division as of October 13, 1991, and the ownership transfer registration has been completed on November 8, 2002 on the ground of the donation as of November 6, 2002, and the ownership transfer registration has been completed on May 1/2, 2013 on the ground of sale as of April 15, 2013.

With respect to the building listed in Attachment 1 List No. 1 of Real Estate Ownership and Possession of the Defendant Building (hereinafter the Defendant Building), the ownership transfer registration has been completed in the G on November 18, 1945 due to the sale as of November 10, 1945, and the ownership transfer registration has been completed in the H on August 12, 1982 due to the inheritance due to the agreement division as of July 10, 1963, and the ownership transfer registration has been completed in the I, J, and K on April 29, 196 due to the inheritance as of May 4, 1984, and the ownership transfer registration was completed in the Defendant C on August 8, 1998 as of February 20, 198.

Defendant D leased and possessed the Defendant’s building up to now.

피고 건물의 원고 토지 일부 침범 별지2 도면과 별지3 지적현황측량성과도에서 보듯이 피고 건물의 일부가 원고 토지 중 별지2 도면 표시 ①, ②, ③, ①을 순차로 연결한 선내 ㈎부분 3.2㎡ 부분(이하 이 사건 침범 부분이라 한다)을 침범하여 축조되어 있다.

[Grounds for recognition] According to the facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 3, Eul evidence Nos. 1 through 2 (including paper numbers), and the purport of the whole pleadings, the defendant C has the duty to remove the part of the crime of this case among the defendant's buildings, deliver the land of the crime of this case to the plaintiff, and the defendant D has the duty to leave the part of the crime of this case among the defendant's buildings.

According to the appraisal result of appraiser M by the court of first instance, the plaintiffs seek on May 29, 2013 regarding the part of the instant intrusion.