1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. Basic facts

A. On July 21, 2014, the Plaintiff registered the transfer of ownership in the name of the Plaintiff with respect to real estate listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “202”) on July 21, 2014, and the E-building to which No. 202 belongs (hereinafter “the instant apartment house”).

B. On July 18, 2013, the Selection C was awarded a subcontract with the cost of construction KRW 22,00,000,000 for the title and steel construction (hereinafter “instant subcontract”) from the Daisung Construction Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Ssung Construction”), a contractor of the instant multi-family housing construction project, and the Defendant and the Selection are the parents of the Selection C.

(hereinafter referred to as “Defendant, etc.”) when referring both Defendant, Claimant, and D.

On August 15, 2013, F, the owner of the new apartment house in this case, sold 202 units due to the payment of the construction price to Yusung Construction. The sales contract in this case is called "the sales contract in this case."

A) Around August 2013, 2013, a certificate of water payment was drawn up with the purport that the flexible construction will transfer No. 202 to the designated parties C by payment in kind for the construction price. D. The Defendant, etc. currently occupies and uses the instant apartment house. [The fact that there is no dispute over the grounds for recognition, evidence No. 1, No. 1, No. 1, No. 7, and No. 9, and the purport of the entire pleadings.

2. According to the judgment on the grounds of the claim, since the registration of ownership transfer in the name of the plaintiff was made with respect to 202, the plaintiff is presumed to acquire ownership based on legitimate grounds of registration.

Therefore, the defendant et al. is obligated to deliver 202 units to the plaintiff and return unjust enrichment equivalent to the rent due to the occupancy use of 202 units, except in extenuating circumstances.

3. Determination on the defendant's defense

A. Although the defendant et al.’s defense F and flexible construction were sold to the designated parties C as payment for the construction cost of the instant subcontract, they were transferred twice to the plaintiff and transferred to the plaintiff for the registration of ownership transfer.