1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is the owner of 3453 square meters prior to C in Yangju-si (hereinafter “Plaintiff’s land”), and the Defendant is the owner of 647 square meters and 165 square meters for E miscellaneous land in Yangju-si (hereinafter “Defendant’s land”).

B. The Defendant owned a house on the ground of the Defendant’s land, and part of the Defendant’s house owned by the Defendant was built by intrusion on the Plaintiff’s land.

C. As the instant lawsuit, the Plaintiff sought the removal of the Defendant’s house owned by the Plaintiff, which was built by intrusioning on the Plaintiff’s land, and the delivery of the land portion, the Defendant removed the part of the Defendant’s house in violation of the Plaintiff’s land to its boundary.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1 to Gap evidence 3, Eul evidence 1 to Eul evidence 4 (including partial numbers) and images, and the result of each request for surveying and appraisal with respect to appraiser F, the purport of the whole pleadings.

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The plaintiff asserts that the defendant still infringed the plaintiff's land and owned the building, and the defendant asserts that the plaintiff should remove the building corresponding to the part and deliver the part of the site.

B. We examine the judgment, as seen earlier, that the Defendant removed the part of the Defendant’s house on which the Plaintiff was a party’s land, and there is no evidence to find otherwise that the Defendant still commits a crime against the Plaintiff’s land and owns the Plaintiff’s house.

3. According to the conclusion, the plaintiff's claim of this case is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.