A. On May 31, 2004, the Defendant and Nonparty C drafted a protocol of compromise with the content that C would deliver three floors among the buildings located in Yeongdeungpo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government D (hereinafter “instant building”) to the Defendant in the case of requesting a compromise of building name No. 2004-151 of this Court.

B. On July 3, 2013, the Defendant granted to Nonparty E the right of representation for the delivery execution of the instant building, and was handed over the instant building on July 19, 2013 in the compulsory execution procedure upon request from Nonparty E.

C. On July 19, 2013, the Plaintiff entered into a contract with the Defendant to keep the goods shipped out of the instant building (hereinafter “instant goods”) in the “F warehouse” operated by the Plaintiff, setting the storage fees of KRW 4.6 million per month, distribution vehicle expenses of KRW 11,500,000 per month (hereinafter “instant storage contract”).

In accordance with the instant storage contract, from July 19, 2013, the Plaintiff kept the instant goods in a depository until December 27, 2013, which was sold during the sale of corporeal movables (No. 2013No. 3578) from the instant storage contract, to the buyer.

[Ground for Recognition: Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, Gap evidence 3-6, the purport of the whole pleadings]

2. Determination:

A. According to the above facts, the Defendant is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff KRW 28,313,00,00 for agreed storage fees from July 19, 2013 to December 27, 2013 and KRW 35,835,483 (=35,483 (=24,35,483, 11,50,000 won) as well as for distribution vehicle expenses of KRW 11,50,00,00 (=24,35,483, 11,50,000).

B. As to this, the Defendant asserted that, as he did not have the authority to conclude the instant storage contract on behalf of the Defendant, he cannot respond to the Plaintiff’s claim.

Therefore, the execution of delivery of the building of this case is completed on July 19, 2013 by E, for whom the right of representation for the delivery execution of the building of this case was granted by the Defendant.