1. Revocation of the first instance judgment.

2. The defendant shall be the plaintiff.

A. The second floor office among the real estate listed in the attached list is 181.

1. The reasoning for this part of the judgment regarding the defense prior to the merits is as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, and thus, this part is cited in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. Judgment on the merits

A. Basic facts [the grounds for recognition: (a) the real estate listed in the attached list (hereinafter “instant real estate”) was newly constructed on or around March 2007. The Plaintiff and the Defendant jointly used the second floor (hereinafter “instant office”) of the instant real estate from June 2008. Employees J and I jointly performed the duties of the Plaintiff and the Defendant at the above office, as well as the Plaintiff at the above office.

(2) On December 15, 2008, the Plaintiff filed a provisional registration on December 10, 2008 with respect to the instant real estate on the grounds of a pre-sale agreement on December 10, 2008. On June 24, 2011, the Plaintiff completed the registration of ownership transfer for the instant real estate on the grounds of sale as of May 24, 201.

(3) On March 28, 2014, the Plaintiff reported that the instant office was leased free of charge (0 won for lease on a deposit basis and monthly rent) to the Defendant from May 24, 201 to May 23, 2016 in relation to the current status of the lease of the commercial building of the instant real estate in the Net Tax Office.

B. (1) The parties’ assertion (1) The Plaintiff’s Network D and C jointly used the instant office in a partnership relationship that operates the Plaintiff with the Defendant. The Plaintiff had the Defendant use the instant office free of charge from May 24, 201 to May 23, 2016. However, even after the said period, the Defendant occupied the instant office and did not deliver it to the Plaintiff.

Therefore, the Plaintiff seeks the Defendant to return unjust enrichment equivalent to the rent from the day following the expiration of the period of delivery and free use of the said office.

(2) The Plaintiff and the Defendant are the instant case on October 31, 2012.