1. The Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) shall pay to the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) KRW 22,270,890 as well as the full payment from September 23, 2014.

A principal lawsuit and a counterclaim shall be deemed simultaneously.

1. Grounds for the instant claim

A. After completing the registration of the right to collateral security with F and G on each of the instant lands, E newly constructed a collective housing on each of the instant lands (hereinafter “the instant collective housing”).

As to the above multi-family housing, E had completed the registration of collateral security between F and G in relation to the above multi-family housing Nos. 101, 201, 202, 301, and 302.

Then, on May 26, 2005, the Plaintiff and H acquired ownership by winning a successful bid for the entire land and multi-unit housing in 101, 201, 202, 301, and 302 among the instant land and multi-unit housing, which were commenced upon the voluntary auction application of F and G, and the ownership of each of the instant multi-unit housing.

On the other hand, on June 30, 2005, the defendant purchased 401 square meters (49.53 square meters of the exclusive ownership area) of the above multi-family housing from I and acquired its ownership.

The above multi-family housing is an aggregate building, which is one of 101 through 402 square meters, and the aggregate area of each of the instant lands, is 413 square meters. Thus, the Defendant owned 401 square meters in each of the instant lands, thereby gaining unjust enrichment by occupying and using approximately 41.14 square meters in each of the instant lands (=49.53/497.2/497.2/413) without title.

Therefore, the Defendant should pay to the Plaintiff the amount of money stated in the purport of the claim as the amount equivalent to the rent due to the occupation and use of 41.14 square meters among each of the instant land.

B. The Defendant, which caused the counterclaim, owns 401 of the instant collective housing, and the Plaintiff, as a site for the instant collective housing, owns 46.19/413 of the instant land subject to site ownership, and does not own the entire part of the instant collective housing.

The apartment house of this case is subject to the disposition of the section for exclusive use that it has as an aggregate building, and it is recognized that the section for exclusive use is separated from the section for exclusive use.

Therefore, the defendant is therefore the case.