1. The Defendant-Counterclaim Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) indicated the attached Form No. 8, 2, 3, 11, 10, 9.

A principal lawsuit and a counterclaim shall be deemed simultaneously.

1. The following facts may be found either in dispute between the parties or in full view of Gap evidence 1 to 4, Eul evidence 5, and the purport of all pleadings:

On August 10, 198, the Plaintiff is the owner of C road 120 square meters (hereinafter “Plaintiff’s land”). On July 15, 1986, the Defendant purchased D large 324 square meters and buildings on its ground adjacent to the Plaintiff’s land, and completed the registration of ownership transfer on July 23, 1986.

B. Of the Plaintiff’s land, a fence (hereinafter “instant fence”) is installed on the part of 34 square meters in a ship indicated in the purport of the claim in the Plaintiff’s land (B), and the Defendant currently occupies and uses the instant land in question.

2. Determination

A. According to the Plaintiff’s request for removal of the wall of this case and the determination on the claim for removal of land, the Defendant is obligated to remove the wall of this case to the Plaintiff and deliver the land in this case to the Plaintiff, barring special circumstances.

B. On July 15, 1986, at the time of purchasing the Plaintiff’s above D site No. 324 square meters and above ground buildings adjacent to the Plaintiff’s land, the Defendant had installed the instant fence on the instant dispute land, and maintained its location and shape without any change, and the Defendant succeeded to the land as it is until now, and the acquisition by prescription was completed on July 23, 1986 by using the land in a peaceful manner as owner’s intent to own the land in the instant dispute, and by using it as owner’s possession and public performance on July 23, 2006. As such, the Defendant’s assertion 1 as to the Defendant’s defense of acquisition by prescription and at the same time requested the Plaintiff to implement the registration procedure for transfer of ownership based on the completion of acquisition by prescription on the land in the instant dispute as the counterclaim.

In relation to this, the Plaintiff, at around 1997, reconstructed the instant fence at the time when the Defendant removed the previous multi-story house, and constructed the new building, and the Defendant’s land through the survey.