1. Defendant C shall deliver to the Plaintiff the real estate listed in the separate sheet.

2. The plaintiff's claim against the defendant B.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On July 12, 2019, the Plaintiff is the owner of the instant real estate acquired by being awarded a successful bid for the real estate indicated in the separate sheet in the Incheon District Court D Voluntary Auction Case (hereinafter “instant real estate”).

B. Defendant C is practically occupying the instant real estate while residing in the instant real estate by leasing the instant real estate from Defendant B.

C. Defendant B leases the instant real estate to Defendant C and indirectly occupies the instant real estate.

However, Defendant B did not enter into a contract with the Plaintiff, the owner of the instant real estate, or the former owner of the instant real estate, regarding the ownership or possession of the instant real estate.

[Grounds for recognition] The items of evidence Nos. 1, 4, and 5, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. According to the above facts of recognition as to the claim against Defendant C, Defendant C, who actually occupies the instant real estate, is obligated to deliver the instant real estate to the Plaintiff, who is the owner of the instant real estate.

B. The Plaintiff asserts to the effect that Defendant B was obligated to deliver the instant real estate to the Plaintiff, as it did not have any lease relationship with the Plaintiff as well as the former owner, since Defendant B leased the instant real estate to Defendant C without any lease relationship with the former owner.

Therefore, in order to claim the surrender or surrender on the ground of an illegal possession, it should be done against the person who actually occupies the object, and as long as the illegal possessor does not actually possess the object by delivering it to another person, the claim for surrender or surrender against the person is unreasonable.

(See Supreme Court Decision 98Da9045 delivered on July 9, 199, etc.). In light of the above legal principles, Defendant B and the former owner of the Plaintiff or the instant real estate have any contractual relationship with respect to the instant case.