건물인도 등
1. The defendant, among the buildings listed in the separate sheet 1 attached to the plaintiff, each point of the indication of the annexed drawing, the number of buildings, and the number of buildings listed in the separate sheet 1.
1. The following facts of recognition do not conflict between the parties, or are recognized by comprehensively taking account of the overall purport of the arguments in each of the images listed in Gap evidence 1-1-4, Gap evidence 6, Eul evidence 1-1-2, Eul evidence 1-2, Gap evidence 8, 11-1, evidence 13-1, and evidence 1-2.
A. The Plaintiff is the owner of each building and its site indicated in the separate sheet.
B. The Defendant, in opening and operating a camera under the name of his spouse E, has registered the Fdong and D Dong buildings indicated in the table Nos. 1 of the attached list as one building, among the buildings listed in the attached list Nos. 1 of the attached list, which are linked in sequence 96 square meters in the order of each point in Cdong (the current status: neighborhood living facilities and housing).
Of the attached drawings, the parts D-dong (current Status): 34 square meters (hereinafter the above two buildings) connected with each point in order, among the items of the attached drawings, occupy the above two buildings (hereinafter the “instant real estate”).
2. The assertion and judgment
A. According to the above facts of recognition as to the cause of the claim, the defendant is obligated to deliver the real estate of this case to the plaintiff unless he proves his lawful title of possession.
B. The defendant's argument 1) argues that the defendant first occupies the real estate of this case with the plaintiff's consent, but there is no evidence to acknowledge this, the defendant's above argument cannot be accepted. 2) Next, the defendant accepted the real estate of this case with materials of at least 20 million won to operate the carpet, and thus, the defendant has the right to attract the real estate of this case until he receives reimbursement of the necessary or useful expenses. However, since there is no evidence to deem that the defendant spent the necessary or useful expenses with respect to the real estate of this case, the defendant's above argument cannot be accepted.
3. If so, the plaintiff's claim of this case is reasonable and acceptable.