1. The defendant shall deliver to the plaintiff the buildings listed in the attached Table 2 attached hereto.

2. The plaintiff's remaining claims are dismissed.

3...

Based on the facts, the Plaintiff: (a) won the instant real estate at the auction procedure for the auction of the real estate for each real estate listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter referred to as “each of the instant real estate”) [the auction procedure of this case] (hereinafter referred to as “instant auction procedure”); and (b) paid the sale price on February 9, 2017, and acquired the ownership of each of the instant real estate.

The defendant occupies the building listed in the attached Table 2 (hereinafter referred to as the "building of this case"), and the land listed in the attached Table 1, as stated in the attached Table 1.

[Reasons for Recognition: Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 2 (Evidence Nos. 1 and 2 (Evidence No. 1) and the purport of the whole pleadings)] According to the above basic facts of the judgment as to the ground of claim as to the claim for delivery of the building of this case, the defendant is obligated to deliver the building of this case to the plaintiff, unless there are special circumstances, such as assertion and proof of the right to possess the building of this case

The defendant's defense of the defendant against the defendant's defense is "the construction of this case" of the building "within the first floor, outside, outside, outside, outside, third floor, and the main foundation" of the building in total of KRW 341,00,00 with the F Co., Ltd. (hereinafter "F") on February 2, 2014 and total of KRW 341,00.

Upon entering into a contract, there is a claim for the construction cost equivalent to KRW 105,00,000, and the possession of the instant building was owned as F from July 20, 2014, prior to the commencement of the auction procedure.

Since the defendant has commercial lien on the building of this case, he has the right to possess the real estate of this case.

Plaintiff’s assertion

It cannot be deemed that the Defendant actually proceeded with the instant construction and thus, the claim for construction payment has been made.

Even if the lien holder of the instant building cannot oppose the Plaintiff as the lien holder.

Therefore, the Defendant did not have the title to possess each of the instant real estate, and thus, each of the instant cases to the Plaintiff.