2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the Defendants.

A. The plaintiff (1949) and the defendant B (1953) are married couple who completed the marriage report on March 8, 1977, and the defendant C (1977) are married children of the plaintiff and the defendant.

B. Around December 2016, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit claiming divorce and consolation money against Defendant B.

(Seoul Family Court 2016ddan53841) On July 25, 2018, the court accepted the Plaintiff’s claim for divorce and dismissed the Plaintiff’s claim for consolation money on the ground that “the marital relationship between the Plaintiff and the Defendant has ceased to exist and that the liability has arisen to both parties.”

Defendant B appealed against the above judgment and filed an incidental appeal by the Plaintiff, but the appellate court (Seoul Family Court 2018Reu31652) dismissed both the appeal and the incidental appeal, and the above judgment of the first instance became final and conclusive on June 15, 2019.

C. Each real estate listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant real estate”) is owned by the Plaintiff. The Defendants occupied the instant real estate and live in the same.

【Ground of recognition】 The fact that there has been no dispute, entry of Gap Nos. 1-5 and 7, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. According to the above facts, the Defendants, the possessor of the instant real estate, are obligated to deliver the instant real estate to the Plaintiff, the owner of the instant real estate, barring special circumstances.

B. The Defendants’ assertion against the Defendants filed a claim for division of property on the grounds that Defendant B contributed to the acquisition and maintenance of the instant real estate along with the Plaintiff during the marriage period. Thus, the Defendants asserted to the effect that Defendant B had the right to lawfully possess the instant real estate until the result reaches the said right, and that Defendant C had the right to possess the instant real estate since it is a child to be supported by the Plaintiff.

However, there is no basis to acknowledge that Defendant B had the right to possess the instant real estate until the result of the claim for division of property on the instant real estate solely on the ground that Defendant B claimed for division of property, and there is evidence No. 6.