(a) remove the buildings listed in the annex 2 list; and

(b) the land listed in the annex 1 list;

A. On October 13, 2014, the Plaintiff completed the registration of ownership transfer on the land listed in the separate sheet No. 1 (hereinafter “instant land”) on the ground of “sale by voluntary auction on October 13, 2014.” B, on February 17, 2009, on the building listed in the separate sheet No. 2 (hereinafter “instant building”) (hereinafter “instant building”). The instant building is located on the ground of the instant land.

C. Meanwhile, upon the death of B on February 29, 2012, the Defendant inherited B’s property.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 4, purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination on the cause of the claim

A. According to the above facts, the defendant is obligated to remove the building of this case to the plaintiff, deliver the land of this case to the plaintiff, and return without a legitimate title the profits gained by occupying and using the land of this case to the unjust enrichment.

B. Furthermore, as to the amount of unjust enrichment to be returned by the Defendant, the amount of profit from the possession and use of the instant land shall be equivalent to the rent. According to the result of the court’s entrustment of appraisal of rent, the monthly rent for the instant land from October 13, 2014 to July 24, 2015 can be recognized as constituting 554,400, which is close to the date of the conclusion of the pleadings of the instant case. Accordingly, the amount of unjust enrichment to be returned by the Defendant shall be the amount calculated by multiplying 54,40,00 won per month from October 13, 2014 when the Plaintiff acquired ownership of the instant land from October 13, 2014 to the date when the delivery of the instant land is completed.

C. Therefore, the Defendant is obligated to remove the instant building to the Plaintiff, deliver the instant land, and pay 54,400 won per month from October 13, 2014 to the date of the removal of the instant building and the delivery of the instant land.

3. Thus, the plaintiff's claim of this case is justified.