A. The Plaintiff is an owner who completed the registration of ownership transfer on October 5, 2016 with respect to the real estate listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant real estate”).

B. The Defendants occupy the instant real estate.

C. The annual rent for the part of the first floor among the instant real property is equivalent to KRW 56,282,00.

2. The parties' assertion

A. The Defendants asserted that they were entitled to exercise their right of retention and possess the real estate of this case, but it is difficult to recognize the right of retention.

Therefore, the Defendants seek damages equivalent to KRW 1 million per month from the date of the Plaintiff’s acquisition of ownership to the date of delivery.

B. Defendant A’s assertion by the Defendants is an exercise of a lien by setting the claim for construction cost as the preserved right against the instant real estate.

(B) Defendant B did not assert the title to possess the Plaintiff’s claim of this case. The legal brief submitted by the Defendants’ legal representative can only be asserted as to Defendant A’s title to possession.

3. Determination

A. As to whether Defendant A has the right to possess the instant real estate, it is insufficient to recognize the assertion that Defendant A has a lien solely on the evidence submitted by the Defendants.

B. Therefore, the Defendants are jointly obligated to jointly deliver the instant real estate to the Plaintiff, and to pay the money calculated at the rate of KRW 1,00,000 per month, as sought by the Plaintiff, within the limit of an amount equivalent to the rent equivalent to the Plaintiff’s ownership from October 5, 2016 to the delivery date of the instant real estate.

4. The plaintiff's claim of this case is accepted in its conclusion.