1. Of the part regarding the principal lawsuit in the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) regarding the claim for monetary payment.

A principal lawsuit and a counterclaim shall be deemed simultaneously.

1. The court's explanation on this part of the facts of recognition is identical to the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, and thus, citing it as it is in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. The parties' assertion

A. The Plaintiff acquired the ownership of the instant house in the process of voluntary auction, and the Defendant’s husband’s husband Nonparty C entered into a lease agreement with the Plaintiff without setting a period between the Plaintiff and paid that amounting to KRW 400,000 per month, which was residing in the instant house, but C did not pay the said rent to the Defendant after the death of May 1, 2017. As such, the said lease agreement was terminated on the ground that the Defendant’s rent was unpaid.

Therefore, the Defendant is obligated to deliver the instant house to the Plaintiff and pay unjust enrichment to the Plaintiff by the time of delivery.

B. Defendant 1) Since the Plaintiff acquired the ownership of the instant house pursuant to the title trust agreement between the Defendant and the deceased C, the Plaintiff, a title trustee, could not seek the delivery of the instant house to the Defendant, and no lease agreement was concluded with the content that the Plaintiff asserts. 2) At the time of the Plaintiff’s successful bid of the instant house, the Plaintiff granted the Plaintiff KRW 18,150,000 out of the successful bid price of the instant house, and thus, the Plaintiff made unjust enrichment and the obligation to return it to the Defendant, thereby seeking a counterclaim.

3. Judgment on the main claim

A. On December 21, 2005, the fact that the Defendant remitted and delivered KRW 18150,000 to the Plaintiff on December 21, 2005, which was the day before the Plaintiff paid the successful bid price for the instant housing. There is no dispute between the parties.

On the other hand, the defendant asserts that the above money was given as part of the successful bid price of 48.15 million won, while the plaintiff asserts that the above money was given as part of the successful bid price of 48.1.5 million won, between March 15, 2005 and November 10, 2005, the plaintiff shall be the deceased C.