1. The Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) indicated the attached sheet No. 17, 22, 23, among the land size of 1,342 square meters in Kimcheon-si, Kimcheon-si Co., Ltd. to the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant).

A principal lawsuit and a counterclaim shall be deemed simultaneously.

1. Basic facts do not conflict between the parties, or each of the following facts can be acknowledged in full view of Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 6, and 7-1, 2, 8-1, 2, 9-1, 2, 3, and 1 of evidence Nos. 9-1, 2, 3, and 1 of evidence Nos. 1, 2, 6, and 7-1, 7-2, and 8-2, and 9-1, 2, 3, and the purport of the whole pleadings

On October 31, 2012, the ownership transfer registration was completed on October 31, 2012 with respect to 1,342 square meters in the name of Kimcheon-si, Kimcheon-si, one half of each share in the name of the Plaintiff and D.

(hereinafter “the Plaintiff’s land”). B.

The Defendant is the owner of 646m2 (hereinafter “instant Defendant’s land”), Kimcheon-si, Kimcheon-si, and the instant land and the instant Defendant’s land are in contact with each other.

C. The Defendant installed a concrete block fence with a height of 1.6m to 1.9m, width of 15m, and length of 25m (hereinafter “instant fence”) on the Defendant’s land. The instant fence is installed not only on the Defendant’s land, but also on the ground that not only on the Plaintiff’s land, the attached appraisal of the Plaintiff’s land is indicated in the attached sheet 17, 22, 23, 24, 25, 14, 15, 16, and 17 square meters (hereinafter “the attached sheet”) on the part of 7m2 in the ship connected each point of the Plaintiff’s land.

2. Determination as to the claim on the principal lawsuit

A. According to the facts of the determination as to the cause of the claim, since the fence exists on the land in the dispute of this case, the plaintiff is deemed to have obstructed the exercise of legitimate ownership. One of co-owners of the site is an act of preserving jointly-owned property, and can seek removal of the building constructed on the site and delivery of the site (proviso of Article 265 of the Civil Act). Thus, the defendant is obligated to remove the part of the wall installed on the land in the dispute of this case out of the wall of this case and deliver the land in the dispute of this case to the plaintiff, unless there are special circumstances.

B. Judgment on the Defendant’s assertion 1 is an objection.