Thus, since the defendant appealed to the part of the claim against the defendant, the object of this court's adjudication is limited to the part claims.

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion 1) The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion is the Plaintiff’s ground building C in Kim Jong-si, the Defendant owned by the Defendant around 2014 (hereinafter “instant building”).

A) Purchase or lease of the instant building was made, and a penalty surcharge of KRW 16,072,00 for penalty and non-performance penalty (hereinafter “instant non-performance penalty”) was imposed on the Defendant during the process of obtaining a building permit regarding the instant building without permission at the time

(2) The Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff the amount of the enforcement fine of this case’s unjust enrichment or unjust enrichment of 16,072,00 won, and damages for delay therefrom, as the Plaintiff did not pay the amount of the enforcement fine of this case to the Plaintiff, and the contract between the Plaintiff and the Defendant on the instant building was terminated as the agreement on the price was not reached. The enforcement fine of this case’s building falls under the beneficial cost of the building of this case, and the Defendant obtained profit equivalent to the pertinent amount of the enforcement fine of this case’s building without any legal cause, and thereby, incurred losses to the Plaintiff.

In addition, D, a director of the Plaintiff, decided on June 7, 2014, before the Plaintiff was established, to purchase the instant building and its site when the Plaintiff was established and funds were raised.