The building shall be removed from the building entered in the attached list, and shall be handed over, and B.

4,950,000 won

A. The facts that the building listed in the separate sheet on the determination of the removal and delivery of the building (hereinafter “instant building”) is owned by the Plaintiff, and the facts that the Defendants occupied the instant building from June 26, 2014 to run a business in the trade name “D Co., Ltd.” are not disputed between the parties, or can be acknowledged by comprehensively taking account of the overall purport of the pleadings in the evidence Nos. 1 and 3.

Therefore, the defendants jointly possess the building of this case and interfere with the plaintiff's exercise of ownership of the building of this case. Thus, each plaintiff is obliged to leave the building of this case and deliver the building of this case to each plaintiff.

B. Determination 1 on the claim for return of unjust enrichment equivalent to the rent 1) The Plaintiff’s alleged Defendants jointly occupied and used the instant building, thereby obtaining unjust enrichment of KRW 31,185,00,00, the monthly rent of the instant building, and suffered damages equivalent to the said amount. As such, the Plaintiff is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff the amount at the rate of KRW 31,185,00,000 per month until the delivery of the instant building is completed due to the return of unjust enrichment. 2) According to the above acknowledged facts, the Defendants, without any legal cause, obtained gains from the use of the instant building, which is an indivisible benefit, by jointly occupying and using the instant building without causing any indivisible cause, thereby incurring damages equivalent to the said amount to the Plaintiff. Accordingly, each Plaintiff shall be deemed liable to return unjust enrichment equivalent to the profits from the use of the instant building.

As to the amount of unjust enrichment to be returned by the Defendants, the amount of profit from the possession and use of real estate in ordinary cases is equivalent to the rent of the real estate. In full view of each of the evidence Nos. 2 and 4, the Plaintiff’s argument as a whole, as to July 10, 2013, is about 48 months of the lease term and 27 million won of the rent of the instant building to E.