건물인도
1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.
Purport of claim and appeal
purport.
1. As to the cause of claim
A. In addition to the facts in dispute between the parties and the statement in Gap evidence No. 1, registration of preservation of ownership was completed on July 4, 2013 and the whole purport of pleadings, registration of ownership was completed on the building of this case by sharing one-half shares of each of the 11/12. On July 4, 2014, the plaintiff on July 3, 2014 and the plaintiff on July 4, 2014, the registration of transfer of all co-owners’ share in the building of this case was completed, and the defendant can recognize the fact that he currently occupies and uses the building of this case.
B. Therefore, barring special circumstances, the Defendant, who possesses the instant building, has the duty to deliver the instant building to the Plaintiff presumed to be a legitimate owner of the instant building.
2. The defendant's assertion and judgment
A. The Defendant’s assertion that the Plaintiff completed the registration of ownership transfer as to the building of this case is due to false conspiracy and thus, the registration of ownership transfer under the Plaintiff’s name should be cancelled. The Defendant lent KRW 45 million as construction cost to D who newly built and sold the building of this case and owned the building of this case. D, the actual owner of the building of this case, was to reside in the building of this case until D repaid the loan repayment, and thus, he/she occupied the building of this case. Thus, there is a legitimate authority to occupy the building of this case.
B. There is no evidence that the legal act that the plaintiff completed the registration of ownership transfer as to the building of this case is a conspiracy, and there is no evidence to acknowledge that D is the actual owner of the building of this case, and each of the above arguments by the defendant are without merit.
3. As such, the plaintiff's claim is accepted on the grounds of its reasoning, and the judgment of the court of first instance is justified on the grounds of its conclusion, and it is so decided as per Disposition by the defendant.