A. As to KRW 3,796,230, respectively, and KRW 3,754,438 among the plaintiffs (appointed parties) and Appointed C.

2. Judgment with no applicable provisions of Acts (Article 208 (3) 1 of the Civil Procedure Act);

3. The obligation to return unjust enrichment due to the possession of another’s real estate by partial dismissal (Dismissal of a claim for damages for delay as to a part of the unjust enrichment in 2019) is liable for delay from the time of receipt of the claim for performance (Supreme Court Decision 2007Da8914 Decided February 1, 2008), and a lawsuit was brought to seek payment in advance for future claims.

No one may cause the debtor to be in a state of delay prior to the due date. The unjust enrichment in 2019 that occurred until the date of delivery of a duplicate of the complaint in this case (on November 22, 2019) shall be KRW 3,495,349 won 3,684,000 x 40.379 square meters x 38.01 square meters x 326 (from January 1, 2019 to November 22, 2019) / 365 x the remainder 418,155 x 40.3,684,00 x 40.379 square meters / 38.01 x 39 (on November 23, 2019 to December 31, 2019) x 365 x 15 x 465 x 15 x 194 x 5 194 x 15 x 5 194 x 5 x 194 x 5 x 194 x 5 x 194 x 15 x 194 x 194 14 .

(A) If the portion to be responsible for delay is calculated based on this, each of the Plaintiff (Appointed Party) and the Appointed Party C, KRW 3,754,438,36,230, KRW 41,792, KRW 41,792, KRW 45,028,235, KRW 15,195,520, KRW 167,285.