1. The Defendant indicated in the attached Form No. 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 15, 14, 13, 12, 11, 10, among the land size of 283 square meters in Seopopopo-si C orchard 283 square meters to the Plaintiff.

1. Where a parcel of land is registered with one parcel of land in the cadastral record under the Act on the Judgment of the Cause for Claim, the location, parcel number, land category, land category, and boundary of the parcel of land shall be specified by this registration unless there are other special circumstances, and the scope of ownership shall be determined by the boundary on the public record regardless of the boundary of the reality, and where there are special circumstances such as where, in preparing the cadastral map, the boundary of the parcel of land has been prepared differently from the true boundary due to technical errors, such as the error of selecting points in the cadastral record, etc., if

(Supreme Court Decision 94Da57879 delivered on April 14, 1995). The Plaintiff is the owner of Seopopo-si C orchard 283 square meters.

The defendant occupies the part (B) of the attached Form No. 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 15, 14, 13, 12, 11, 10, and 2 of the above land, which connects each point in order.

(C) In light of the above legal principles, the above facts are examined as follows: (a) there is no dispute; (b) Gap evidence 1-2; and (c) there is no evidence to prove that the cadastral record was mistakenly prepared; and (d) the part of the above ship is judged as owned by the plaintiff according to registration in the cadastral record regardless of the location of the brick; and (b) the defendant occupied the part of the above ship, and thus, the defendant is obligated to deliver the part of the above sub-paragraph

2. The plaintiff's claim for conclusion is justified and acceptable.