1. The defendant is among the buildings listed in paragraph (2) of the attached Table, constructed on the ground of the land listed in the attached Table No. 1.

Comprehensively taking account of Gap evidence Nos. 1-1, 3, and 4-4 of the judgment on the cause of the claim, the results of appraisal entrustment to the Korea Land Information Corporation in this court, and the purport of the whole pleadings, the plaintiff owned the land listed in attached Table Nos. 1 (hereinafter "the land of this case") on July 27, 1990 as the cause of sale and purchase and the date of closing the argument. The defendant held the land of this case on May 22, 2000 with respect to C. 140.5 square meters adjacent to the land of this case (hereinafter "the adjacent land of this case") and the building listed in attached Table No. 2 of the attached Table Nos. 2 of the above ground (hereinafter "the building of this case"), and the building of this case was owned as of the date of closing the argument after completing the registration of transfer of ownership on each ground of sale and purchase, and the fact that the building of this case was in violation of each part of the building "construction" (hereinafter "the land of this case").

Thus, the defendant owned part of the building of this case which was constructed on the ground surface, and thereby interfered with the plaintiff's exercise of ownership over the land of this case. Thus, the part of the building of this case constructed on the part over the part over the land of this case among the building of this case shall be removed and the part over the land of this case shall be handed over.

The defendant's defense of the completion of the prescriptive acquisition period as to the defendant's defense and judgment were based on the summary and judgment of the defendant, since D, which had owned the building of this case from around 1978, occupied it in peace and openly with the intent to own the part over the land of this case for twenty (20) years thereafter, the prescriptive acquisition as to the part over the violation of the land of this case has been completed, and the defendant, who had acquired the ownership of the building of this case from D and E, has the right to claim ownership transfer registration against the plaintiff.