1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

Purport of claim and appeal

purport.

1. In the first instance trial, the Plaintiff requested the Defendant to deliver each of the real estates listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “each of the instant real estates”). The court of first instance dismissed the claim for the delivery of the real estates listed in the separate sheet No. 1, and accepted only the claim for the delivery of the real estates listed in paragraphs 2 through 4 of the same list (hereinafter “each of the instant buildings”).

Since the defendant appealed against this issue, the subject of the judgment of this court is limited to the claim for delivery of each building of this case.

2. Basic facts

A. Regarding each of the instant real estate owned by D Co., Ltd., E filed an application for the auction of real estate rent with Suwon District Court C.

On January 31, 2018, the above court rendered a voluntary decision to commence auction on each of the instant real estate and completed the entry registration of the decision to commence auction on the same day.

(hereinafter “instant auction procedure”). B.

In the instant auction procedure on June 11, 2019, the Plaintiff received a decision to permit the sale of each of the instant real estate on July 31, 2019 and paid the sale price on July 31, 2019, and the same year.

8.22. The registration of ownership transfer is completed with respect to each of the above real estates.

C. The defendant currently occupies each of the buildings of this case.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 6, 12 through 14, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination on the defense prior to the merits

A. Since the Plaintiff filed an order to deliver real estate against the Defendant for an order to deliver real estate, the lawsuit in this case is unlawful as it constitutes a duplicate lawsuit, since it is the same as the case of the above request for the delivery order.

B. According to the reasoning of the evidence Nos. 11 and 12, it is recognized that the Plaintiff filed an order for the delivery of real estate against the Defendant on October 14, 2019 with the Suwon District Court J on the part of Suwon District Court.

However, the principle of prohibition of double lawsuit is the same as the subject matter of the lawsuit in the previous lawsuit, and the parties are the same.