1. The Defendant indicated in the attached Form No. 31, 32, 22, 23, 33 through 35, and 31 among the land size of 4172 square meters in Jeonbuk-gun, Jeonbuk-gun, Seoul.

Basic Facts

The Plaintiff is a person who purchased from D on June 27, 2014, 506 square meters (hereinafter “E land”) in the area of the Eastern-gun, Jeonbuk-gun (hereinafter “E land”) and completed the registration of ownership transfer.

E The land of which F, G, H, and I own 1/4 shares, is the land that is owned by F, G, H, and I, each of which is located in the area of 4172 square meters (hereinafter “instant land”).

On June 201, the Plaintiff leased 98.8 square meters of a detached house on one story of a prefabricated panel board, which the Defendant owned on the E’s land owned by D (hereinafter “Defendant-owned housing”) from the Defendant. From among the land in dispute in this case, the Plaintiff used 103 square meters of the part (A) in the ship (hereinafter “the part”) (hereinafter “A”) connected each point of 31,32,22,23,33 through 35,31 among the land in dispute in this case, and the part (b) connected each point of 35,34, 36 through 42, 11, 43, 44, and 35 square meters in sequence from the Defendant’s land in this case to the passage of the Defendant (hereinafter “the passage of this case”).

On June 27, 2014, the Plaintiff purchased E land from D and thereafter filed a lawsuit against the Defendant for claim, such as transfer of land, etc. by Jeonju District Court 2014Kadan7047. On October 6, 2015, the said court rendered a judgment that “the Defendant shall remove the Plaintiff’s house and deliver E land,” and the said judgment became final and conclusive around that time.

On January 4, 2016, the Plaintiff filed a building report with the competent authority on the building of the lightweight structure, sand site location plate, and the single house of 85.08 square meters on the land of E, and the said building report was accepted on January 21, 2016.

On March 2016, the Plaintiff removed the Defendant’s house for the construction of the building. At that time, the Defendant installed the entrance door on the instant passage (hereinafter “instant timber entrance door”) and obstructed the Plaintiff’s use of the instant passage.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap 1 to 3, 6, 7, 9, and Eul