1. The Defendant’s Cheongju District Court Decision 2017Kadan861 decided Nov. 29, 2017 (main office) against the Plaintiff.

1. Basic facts

A. On November 29, 2017, the Defendant was sentenced to the Cheongju District Court Decision 2017Kadan861 (main office) and 2017Kadan21516 (Counterclaim) against the Plaintiff, that “the Plaintiff delivers to the Defendant the amount of money calculated at the rate of KRW 1,50,000 per month from September 1, 2013 to September 1, 2013, the delivery of the portion of the commercial building (balling place) in the attached Table 1 connected each point in sequence 1 to 4,1516 (Counterclaim).” The previous judgment became final and conclusive after the appellate trial.

B. The Plaintiff performed the duty to pay unjust enrichment equivalent to the rent of KRW 1,50,000 per month from September 1, 2013 to June 30, 2019, among the contents of the previous judgment, until the date of the closing of argument in the instant case, but did not perform the duty to deliver a commercial building.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 12, 13, and 14, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. According to the facts of the above recognition, compulsory execution based on the preceding judgment shall not be allowed to the extent that “the Plaintiff delivers to the Defendant the amount exceeding the portion that “the Plaintiff paid the amount calculated at the rate of KRW 1,500,000 per month from July 1, 2019 to the day the delivery of the above commercial building is completed,” among the real estate listed in the attached Table 1 list, the portion that “the Plaintiff shall pay to the Defendant the amount equivalent to KRW 1,50,000 per month from among the real estate listed in the attached Table 1 list.”

3. The plaintiff's claim is justified within the scope of the above recognition, and the remaining claims are dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.