*** Si* such******************** apartment*** such*** heading*

Attorney Kim Jong-soo et al.*

Gangnamwon** Gun** Eup** Ri** * ** ****

*** (********************))

* (*****************]]

The above defendants' addresses, Gangwonwon* military** Myeon* * Ri* L****** ***** *

[Defendant-Appellant] Plaintiff 1 and 3 others

A. Defendant LW*, *, * Of the buildings listed in attached Table No. 1 of the attached Table No. 1, the part on the ship (A) part of 110 square meters connected with each point of the attached Table No. 1, 2, 3, 4, 1, among the buildings listed in attached Table No. 2 of the attached Table No. 1, shall be handed over, and (b) the defendant Y* * 60.87 square meters per floor among the buildings listed in the attached Table No. 2 of the attached Table.

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

3. Paragraph 1 can be provisionally executed.

A. On April 14, 2005, the Plaintiff completed each registration for the transfer of ownership in its name as to the buildings listed in [Attachment List Nos. 1 and 2 (hereinafter referred to as "No. 1 building," and "No. 2 building").

B. Defendant Least*, * Ma Ma* occupies the part on the ship (A) which connects each point of the attached Form No. 1, 2, 3, 4, and 1, among the buildings 1, the part on which part is 110 square meters in sequence, among the buildings 1, and * occupies the one floor of the second building 60.87 square meters.

[Ground for Recognition: Facts without dispute, entry in Gap 1 and 2]

2. Determination

A. Determination on the cause of the claim

According to the above facts of recognition, unless there is any assertion and proof as to the title possessed by the Defendants, the Defendants are obliged to deliver each part of the buildings Nos. 1 and 2 to the Plaintiff.

B. Determination of the Defendants’ assertion (1) Summary of the Defendants’ assertion

The defendant last****'s strongwon** in a de facto marital relationship* * Eup** Ri*****,************************************ the number of houses on the first floor and the first building on May 16, 202 after the construction of the first building and the second building, he completed the registration of ownership transfer *** on May 1, 2004 *** the lease deposit in the name of * on May 22, 2004 * lease contract with each of 5 years from May 22, 2004 * the lease deposit set forth in the name of 204 * 400,400,400,500,500, * the lease deposit set forth in the name of the defendant* 50,400,500,000, 204.

However, gambling** Gowon, the site of building Nos. 1 and 2,* Y * Y * Eup* 22-7, 22-8, 22-58, after selling land to the Plaintiff, the Defendant last * asked the Plaintiff to transfer ownership to the Plaintiff as to the building Nos. 1 and 2 while exercising violence against the Plaintiff. The Defendant last * received the purchase price of the building at KRW 50,000,000 as the purchase price of the building, and transferred the ownership of the building Nos. 1 and 2 to the Plaintiff on condition that the Plaintiff receive KRW 1,000,000 from the Plaintiff during the frequency of business within the lease period stipulated in each of the above lease agreements.

As such, since the ownership of the building 1 and 2 is transferred to the Plaintiff ** The lessor status under each of the above lease agreements is succeeded to the Plaintiff. As long as the lease term remains, the Defendants do not have any obligation to deliver the building 1 and 2 to the Plaintiff, and the Plaintiff shall be returned the total amount of KRW 10 million from the Plaintiff.

(2) Determination

First, according to the reasoning of the claim that the Defendants succeeded to the Plaintiff as a lessor status under a lease agreement entered into with 1 and 2 ****, according to the health care unit, 1 and 1-2 (each lease agreement) of 1 and 1-3 (each lease agreement) of the Defendants, Defendant Jung-, *, **, **, *, as alleged by the Defendants. Meanwhile, in full view of the overall purport of the arguments in the testimony of **, the 1 and 2 buildings were built * * and * * and * *. However, in order to avoid compulsory execution by the creditors * * * * in fact, Defendant Choi-, the above buildings were completed the registration of ownership transfer * * in fact, * in fact, the above buildings were concluded under the premise that the Defendants did not enter into a lease agreement or made a deposit under the name of the Defendants, and the Defendants did not accept the above part of the lease agreement.* The Defendants’ assertion that the Defendants did not accept the above part of the lease agreement.

Next, as to whether or not the plaintiff has agreed to pay KRW 100 million under the name of the return of deposit in the case of the transfer of ownership of the building 1 and 2, the defendant Choi*** the term of lease has been guaranteed to the plaintiff, or there is no evidence to acknowledge it. Rather, in full view of the purport of Gap evidence 3, Gap evidence 4-1 and 4, witness Park ***, 1) the Gangwon-do Council***** Eup************************ the registered titleholder of the building 1 and 2) on behalf of the plaintiff on August 14, 2003 * KRW 300,000,000 among the above 30,000 won, * 300,000,000 won among the above 30,000 won under the name of the registered titleholder of the building * 300,000 won.

The facts that the registration of ownership transfer was completed in the future of the plaintiff, (3) the plaintiff paid the remainder of the purchase price to ** on April 14, 2005, and completed the registration of ownership transfer in the future for 1 and 2 buildings. At that time, the defendant Choi * agreed to suspend the frequency collection business under the condition that the plaintiff shall receive 50,00,000 won out of the purchase price, and deliver 1 and 2 buildings to the plaintiff, and (4) gambling* paid 50,00,000 won to the defendant Choi * under the above agreement, and there is no counter-proof otherwise, and therefore, this part of the defendants' assertion is without merit.

3. Conclusion

Thus, the plaintiff is obligated to deliver to the plaintiff the part (A) part 110 square meters in the ship (a) connected with each point of the attached Form No. 1, 2, 3, 4, and 1 among the buildings No. 1, and the part (a) of the defendant * 60.87 square meters in the first floor of the building No. 2. Thus, the plaintiff's claim of this case is justified.