1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion is that the Defendant would receive rent of KRW 46,182,90 per month from April 27, 2017 to July 4, 2017 from D (hereinafter “D”), among the construction works of the building of the building of the building of the building of the building of the building of the Siung-si (hereinafter “instant construction”) from the Defendant, the Plaintiff leased the instant temporary structure of the building of the building of the building of this case. D around August 2017, the instant temporary structure of the building of this case was destroyed without having been installed at the construction site of this case.

Therefore, the Defendant sought the return of the instant temporary materials, and the Defendant, without any legal cause, continuously occupied the instant temporary materials and continued to use them at the construction site of this case, sought a return of unjust enrichment equivalent to the rent from September 1, 2017 to the time of return.

2. In full view of the following circumstances revealed by comprehensively taking account of the descriptions of Gap evidence Nos. 2, 3, Eul evidence Nos. 3, 7, and 15, witness E’s testimony and the overall purport of oral argument, evidence submitted by the plaintiff alone is insufficient to acknowledge the fact that the building temporary materials of this case were installed at the construction site of this case and that the defendant obtained the benefit of the plaintiff’s assertion, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it.

Therefore, the plaintiff's assertion is not accepted.

A. In light of the fact that F&D leased and used a temporary site from the Plaintiff in the vicinity of the instant construction site, and that subparagraph 1 (including a statement of transaction and a serial number) obtained the signature of the D officer in charge on the Plaintiff’s preparation details, and otherwise obtained the confirmation from the Defendant’s side, it is difficult to readily conclude that subparagraph 1 was related to the instant construction site.

B. Upon accumulation of the enemy in the course of the construction process, D transferred its temporary materials installed at the instant construction site, etc. to the Plaintiff, instead of paying the price. Around August 21, 2017, the construction was suspended at the instant construction site. The Plaintiff’s objection to the Defendant on October 12, 2017.