부동산인도등
1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, including the Plaintiff-Counterclaim Defendant’s claim on the principal lawsuit expanded by this court.
1. The grounds for this part of the recognition are as follows: (a) the court added the phrase “E. the Defendant is occupying the instant vehicle from May 18, 2017 to the location of the instant vehicle” between the fourth and third parties at the bottom of the third side of the judgment of the first instance; and (b) as stated in the corresponding part of the reasoning of the judgment of the first instance; and (c) thus, this part is cited in accordance with the main sentence of Article
2. Demand for principal lawsuit:
A. 1) Plaintiff’s claim as to the instant automobile. The Defendant is obligated to deliver the instant automobile to the Plaintiff without any legal cause, and the Defendant is obligated to return to the Plaintiff the amount equivalent to the rent calculated from October 12, 2014 to October 12, 2014, and the amount equivalent to the rent of KRW 1,823,360 per month, and damages for delay paid by the Plaintiff, as unjust enrichment, or to pay damages for tort. Preliminaryly, even if the Defendant did not occupy the instant automobile, the Defendant arbitrarily disposes of the instant automobile. Accordingly, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff the amount equivalent to KRW 47,90,000,00, and damages for delay as to the instant automobile’s premium of KRW 3,765,490, and each of the above money, to the Plaintiff, for the purpose of accepting a claim as to the delivery of the instant automobile from October 12, 2014 to the delivery date of the said automobile, the Defendant is obligated to deliver the instant automobile to the Plaintiff at its own discretion.