2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

The Plaintiff owned a building located on Gyeonggi-gun C and its ground (hereinafter “instant building”). The auction procedure on the instant building was conducted.

B. The Defendant was awarded a successful bid for the instant building in the auction procedure.

C. On May 6, 2012, the Plaintiff entered into a contract with the Defendant’s mother-friendly D, under which the Plaintiff would transfer all the articles of electronic equipment, kitchen products, etc. (hereinafter “instant articles”) other than E’s books and clothes within the instant building (hereinafter “instant articles”) to the Defendant for KRW 3 million, but the Plaintiff would bring E’s books and clothes (hereinafter “instant contract”).

The Plaintiff received KRW 3 million from the Defendant around May 9, 2012.

2. Judgment on the plaintiff's claim

A. The plaintiff's assertion that the defendant rejected the return of the articles owned by the plaintiff, such as the attached Form No. 42 million won. Thus, the defendant asserts that the defendant has a duty to compensate the plaintiff for damages of KRW 50 million (= KRW 42 million).

B. In light of the following circumstances, it is not sufficient to acknowledge the Plaintiff’s above assertion in light of the records and videos stated in Gap’s 2 through 20, 24, 32, 333 (including paper numbers), and Eul’s evidence Nos. 7, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it. Rather, comprehensively taking account of the descriptions and videos stated in Gap’s evidence Nos. 29, 31, Eul’s evidence Nos. 3, 4, 6, 8, 9, 10, 11, Eul’s evidence Nos. 1 and evidence Nos. 29, 31, 4, 6, 8, 9, 10, and 11, Eul’s evidence was mobilized by human parts on May 10, 2012 to put into the MT room and put into door, and the Plaintiff was carrying the goods of this case into the MT on May 11, 2012.