1. The defendant shall be the plaintiff.

A. An Pipe section of the main text of this case, which is located within the scope of the Act, shall be located within the scope of the Act, which is located within the scope of the Act.

1. The Plaintiff purchased the above land on October 16, 2015 in the economic auction procedure with respect to Ansan-si Co., Ltd., 7463m2 (hereinafter “instant land”), which was owned by D, taking into account the following facts: (a) the Plaintiff did not have any dispute over the cause of the claim; (b) the Plaintiff purchased the above land on October 16, 2015; (c) the Plaintiff was obligated to return the said part of the said land to the Plaintiff, to the Plaintiff, the portion of the said land and its appurtenant thereto, which was located within the scope of the lower court’s subdivision and its appurtenant room 7191.5m2, and the indication of the said drawings, which are located within the scope of the lower court’s panel, the lower court’s 13m3m2, and the parts of the above drawings, which were located within the scope of the lower court’s exclusive auction procedure; and (d) the Plaintiff was obligated to return the said part of the said land and its adjacent land to the Plaintiff.

According to the above evidence, it is recognized that the rent under the lease agreement entered into with D as to the above land portion and the above ground plastic houses, etc. possessed by the Defendant was 23,00,000 annually, and it is presumed that the rent for the above land and the above ground plastic houses, etc. after the Plaintiff acquired the ownership of the above land and the above ground plastic houses, etc. is also the same. Thus, the Defendant is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff money calculated at the ratio of 1,916,66 won per month from November 30, 2015, which is the date of acquisition of the Plaintiff’s land and the above ground plastic houses, etc. to the time the Defendant delivers the above possessed portion of each possession (i.e., 23,00,000,00 won/12, less than KRW

Although the Plaintiff sought payment of the amount equivalent to the rent from October 16, 2015, there is no evidence to prove that the Plaintiff acquired the said vinyl, etc. before November 30, 2015, and only the said part of the land.