1. The request is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

In full view of the facts without dispute and the evidence and the purport of the entire pleadings submitted by the Plaintiff, the Defendant purchased the attached building and the attached building and the attached building from C, but completed the registration of ownership transfer as to the attached building on June 16, 2003, and the attached building remaining in C following the public sale procedure conducted on or around June 2012, and acquired its ownership, and the Plaintiff and D Co., Ltd concluded a sales contract as of October 9, 2015 (the date of the sale is not notarized).

The Plaintiff asserts to the effect that statutory superficies under the customary law has been established on the attached building. However, if the Defendant purchased the real estate in a lump sum as shown in the facts recognized, the right to dispose of the attached building was transferred to the Defendant, so it cannot be established under the customary law (in the case of purchasing the land only with the intent to recognize statutory superficies on the ground). However, even if D Co. purchased the attached building in a public sale procedure, it is merely a purchase of the building that has no legal superficies under the customary law, that is, the landowner’s duty to comply with the request for removal.

Therefore, there is no legal superficies from the plaintiff or customary law that purchased the attached building from D Co., Ltd.

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim cannot be accepted, and it is so decided as per Disposition.