1. The defendant shall have the first floor of the second class neighborhood living facilities in the second class of Asan City, D lightweight steel structure, and other branch offices (boards) to the plaintiff.

1. Basic facts

A. The Defendant’s representative director E newly constructed the second class neighborhood living facilities (office) of the second class neighborhood living facilities of the second class neighborhood living facilities of the second class neighborhood living facilities of the second class of Asan City, D lightweight structure, and other branch offices (hereinafter “instant real estate”), and completed the registration of initial ownership on December 28, 2010.

B. On November 18, 2014, the Plaintiff completed the registration of ownership transfer on the ground of sale due to compulsory auction after full payment of the successful bid price in the compulsory auction case (this Court F, G (Dual) with respect to the instant real estate.

C. Meanwhile, on June 10, 2008, the Defendant filed an application for rectification of business registration with the content that the business location of the instant real estate is changed to 143.7 square meters of the (A) premises of the instant real estate (hereinafter “instant dispute”) connected in sequence 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, and 1, among the instant real estate, and filed a report on discontinuance of business as of October 23, 2013, on September 30, 2013.

Since then, the defendant occupies the dispute portion of this case.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap 1, 4, 9 (including each number), Eul 1-3, and 8, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. According to the facts based on the judgment as to the cause of the claim, the defendant is obligated to deliver the part of the dispute to the plaintiff as its owner, unless there are special circumstances.

B. The defendant's defense has the opposing power by lawfully leasing the part of the dispute in this case from E who was the previous owner of the real estate in this case, so the status of the lessor in this case was succeeded to the plaintiff. Therefore, the defendant can refuse the plaintiff's claim in this case until he was refunded the deposit amount of KRW 100 million from the plaintiff.

However, the evidence presented by the defendant alone contains questions as to whether the security deposit to be returned by the defendant exists, and the evidence submitted by the defendant, such as evidence No. 6, is alone, to E.