1. The defendant (Counterclaim plaintiff)'s appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal are assessed against the Defendant-Counterclaim Plaintiff.

purport, purport, and.

1. The first instance court dismissed the Defendant’s counterclaim, citing the Plaintiff’s claim for delivery of real estate and the claim for return of unjust enrichment, dismissing the claim for restoration of the original state (6790,000 won).

Accordingly, since only the defendant appealed against the judgment of the court of first instance, the scope of the judgment of this court is limited to the plaintiff's request for delivery of real estate and the claim for restitution of unjust enrichment and the counterclaim of the defendant

2. The reasoning of the court of first instance’s explanation concerning this case is as follows: (a) the Defendant’s assertion of new addition from the trial of the first instance is as stated in the reasoning of the first instance judgment, except where the lower judgment is added to the last part of paragraph (3) of the judgment of the first instance; and (b) thus, it is acceptable in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

In relation to this, the Defendant asserts that, even if the Defendant renounced the right to demand reimbursement of necessary and beneficial expenses, the special agreement on waiver of the right to demand reimbursement of the necessary and beneficial expenses is null and void against the lessee’s compulsory provisions, and thus, the Plaintiff should pay the amount equivalent to the necessary and beneficial expenses to the Defendant. However, Article 626 of the Civil Act on the right to demand reimbursement of the necessary and beneficial expenses is not a compulsory provision, and thus, the lessee may waive it by agreement between the parties (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 2012Da3609, Mar. 29, 2012; 73Da2010, Apr. 22, 1975). The above assertion by the Defendant, which is based on different premise

3. The judgment of the court of first instance is just and the defendant's appeal is without merit, and it is dismissed as per Disposition.