1. The defendant shall deliver to the plaintiff the building indicated in the attached list.

2. The costs of the lawsuit are assessed against the defendant.

3...

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On September 11, 2013, the Plaintiff acquired the ownership of the building listed in the [Attachment List (hereinafter “instant building”). Around that time, upon receiving a request from the Defendant to temporarily use the instant building, the Plaintiff consented to allow the Defendant to use the said building free of charge until the time the Plaintiff permits it. The Defendant has occupied and used the said building so far.

B. On July 6, 2017, the Plaintiff sent to the Defendant a certificate of content that contains the purport to deliver the instant building to the Defendant by July 30, 2017.

Accordingly, the defendant requested the plaintiff to pay the price that the defendant worked as a manager of the above building, etc., but the plaintiff rejected it.

[Evidence Evidence: Evidence Nos. 1 to 9 (including paper numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply)

(i)each entry or video and the purport of the entire pleadings

2. Judgment on the parties' arguments

A. According to the above facts of determination as to the cause of the claim, the Plaintiff and the Defendant entered into a loan agreement for use of the building of this case between the Plaintiff and the Defendant, and the Plaintiff requested delivery of the building of this case as agreed at the time. Thus, the Defendant is obligated to deliver the building to the Plaintiff.

나. 피고의 주장에 대한 판단 1) 피고는 다음과 같이 주장한다. 즉 피고는 원고로부터 월 100만 원의 급여를 받고 이 사건 건물을 포함한 충신교회의 수련원을 관리하는 일을 해 달라는 부탁을 받아 위 건물을 점유하면서 관리 업무를 하여 왔는데, 원고가 피고의 관리 업무로 인한 비용 내지 급여를 주지 않고 위 건물을 인도받기 위해 피고로 하여금 위 건물을 사용하지 못하게끔 임의로 단수 및 단전 조치를 하고 시건 장치를 하여 피고를 불법하게 내�았으므로, 원고의 청구는 기각되어야 한다. 2) 그러나 위 인정사실과 그 인정증거들에 비추어 볼 때, 을제1 내지 5호증의 각 기재만으로 피고...