1. The part concerning the conjunctive claim in the first instance judgment shall be revoked.

2. The plaintiff's conjunctive claim is dismissed.

3...

1. The grounds for this part of the underlying facts are as stated in Paragraph (1) of the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for the deletion of the part that stated as “Plaintiff B”, “Plaintiff D”, and “Plaintiff C” as “Co-Plaintiff B of the first instance trial,” “Co-Plaintiff D of the first instance trial,” “Co-Plaintiff of the first instance trial,” and “Co-Plaintiff C of the first instance trial,” and the part that “it is occupying the instant picture from that time to that time” at the fifth lower end, and therefore, they are cited as it is in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the

2. Judgment on the plaintiff's conjunctive claim

A. The defendant's assertion that I received the instant picture from the plaintiff as a substitute payment and disposed of it to the defendant is different from the fact that I lawfully acquired the forest.

The plaintiff only left the custody of the forest to I, and I sold the forest to the defendant in collusion with the defendant.

Therefore, the defendant, who is the illegal possessor of the above forest, has the duty to deliver the above forest to the plaintiff as the owner.

B. If a request for surrender or surrender is to be made on the ground of an unlawful possession, it must be made against the person who actually occupies the subject matter, and, even if the illegal possessor is, it does not actually possess the subject matter, a claim for surrender or surrender against that person is unreasonable.

(2) In this case, the defendant delivered the forest of this case to the J, who operates the Cream at Asan City while keeping the forest of this case, and delivered the forest of this case to another person, according to the whole purport of the entry and pleading in the evidence No. 11 and the defendant delivered the forest of this case to the J, who operates the Cream at Asan City, and the above facts of recognition are examined in light of the legal principles as seen earlier.