1. The Defendants deliver to the Plaintiffs the real estate stated in the separate sheet.

2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the Defendants.

1. Basic facts

A. On May 29, 2008, the registration of ownership preservation was completed in the name of Non-Party F Co., Ltd. on the real estate listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant real estate”).

Since then, the registration of transfer of ownership was completed due to the trust in the name of G Co., Ltd., and the registration of transfer of ownership was completed again in the name of F Co., Ltd.

On June 28, 2016, the registration of transfer of ownership based on a compulsory auction was completed in the name of H on June 28, 2016, and on February 6, 2018, the registration of transfer of ownership was completed in the name of each of the plaintiffs on February 21, 2018.

Until now, the plaintiffs are owners of the real estate of this case.

B. Current real estate of this case is currently possessed by the Defendants.

(2) Defendant D’s assertion that he does not occupy the real estate of this case under the agreement with Nonparty I, but Defendant D may, at least, be deemed to have occupied the real estate of this case by the direct possession of the remaining Defendants of this case. [The grounds for recognition] The fact that there is no dispute, and the entries of evidence Nos. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 8, 9, 10, 18, 19, 20, 20, 21, and 22, and the purport of the entire pleadings, as a whole.

2. The circumstance that there was an agreement between Defendant D, etc. and the internal director I of F and J Co., Ltd. and Defendant D on the possession and management of the instant real estate, etc., or the evidence submitted by the Defendants alone does not recognize that there was a justifiable reason to refuse the Plaintiffs’ request for surrender, which acquired ownership by winning the instant real estate.

(The grounds for Defendant D’s “approval of possession” are as follows: (a) whether it is possible to assert in relation to the relationship with Nonparty I or F Co., Ltd. that he/she had obtained such approval, does not constitute grounds to oppose the Plaintiffs; and (b) otherwise, it is recognized that there exists such grounds.