부당이득금 반환
1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.
Purport of claim and appeal
1..
1. The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance citing the instant case is as follows, and this case is cited in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act, since the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance is the same as that of the court of first instance,
(1) The grounds for appeal by the Defendant are not significantly different from the allegations in the first instance court, and the judgment of the first instance court is deemed legitimate even if the evidence submitted by the Defendant, which was lawfully adopted and investigated by the first instance court, is deemed to have been presented by viewing the evidence submitted by the Defendant in this court). 2. The part that was used or deleted as of February 2, 200, 9 through 3, and 1, respectively, shall be deleted as follows. (1) With respect to the land and buildings listed in the separate sheet Nos. 1, 24, 208, 1, 2, 3, 3, 2009, 2, 2, 3, 3, 2009, 2, 3, 3, 3, 3, 2009, 3, 3, 3, 4, 3, 2, 3, 2, 3, 2,
Each "this Court" in the 3th, 11th, 16th, and 21th of the judgment of the first instance shall be applied to "Yan District Court Eunpyeong Housing Sitewon".
The "Appraiser" in Part 13 of the judgment of the court of first instance shall be replaced by "Appraiser of the court of first instance".
The first instance court's 5th 20 and 21th 21th 1st 20 to 6th 1st 20 shall be followed as follows:
It is difficult for the defendant to understand that there is a legitimate ground to believe that there is a right that includes the right to receive negligence with respect to the building of this case, and it is also difficult to recognize that the plaintiff is a bona fide possessor.
The 6th and 13th of the judgment of the first instance shall be followed as follows.
In full view of the statements in Eul evidence 8-1 and the testimony of the party witness R, the plaintiff, around January 2, 2017, had the production director R take charge of a field investigation to build a factory in the real estate of this case and the defendant stay in the building of this case.