1. The decision of the court of first instance, including the plaintiff's claim extended and reduced in this court, is as follows.

1. The reasoning for the court’s explanation in this part is as follows: (a) Section 5 of the first instance judgment: (b) of the first instance judgment, “the Jeonju City imposed KRW 3,837,00 on the Plaintiff on January 18, 2018 with regard to the alteration of the above use; (c) KRW 4,05,000 for enforcement fines on February 22, 2019; and (d) the Plaintiff paid all of them; and (c) Section 8 of the fifth part of the first instance judgment [the evidence No. 20,21 of the first instance judgment is added to the evidence No. 20,” and thus, it is cited as it is in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. Determination on the claim of this case

A. 1) The Plaintiff entered into an entrusted operation contract with the Defendant on the instant building. The Defendant operated the Han-do Rental Business in violation of its intended purpose at the instant building; the pre-sale price issued a corrective order; thus, the Plaintiff refused to deliver these matters; and the Plaintiff was also subject to a charge for compelling compliance. On December 12, 2017, the Plaintiff expressed his/her intention to terminate the contract to the Defendant on December 13, 2017, and the mail was delivered to the Defendant on December 13, 2017, and the period of the entrusted operation contract expired on August 14, 2019. Since the amount equivalent to the charge for compelling compliance and the amount of unjust enrichment already paid from the Defendant’s deposit are not remaining, the Defendant did not transfer the instant building to the Plaintiff and return the unjust enrichment from occupying the instant building.2) The Defendant’s court’s explanation in this part is consistent with the corresponding part of the judgment of the first instance, thereby citing it as is in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

B. The reasoning for the court’s explanation in this part is as stated in the judgment of the court of first instance, except for the case where the article 8(5) of the judgment of the court of first instance is used as follows. Thus, this part of the judgment is cited in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.