1. The defendant delivery to the plaintiff of Daegu Suwon-gu C 106 Dong 406 (Land Number Mark D Apartment-gu, Daegu Suwon-gu)

2...

1. The apartment as stated in the judgment on the plaintiff's claim is owned by the plaintiff, and the fact that the defendant currently occupies the apartment as stated in the order does not conflict between the parties, or can be acknowledged by the entry of Gap evidence No. 1.

Thus, unless the defendant proves that he had the right to possess the apartment recorded in the disposition, the defendant is obligated to deliver it to the plaintiff.

2. The defendant's assertion asserts that, since the defendant prepared all the purchase price of the apartment as stated in the order and paid all the secured debts, the apartment as stated in the order is owned by the defendant or has the right of possession.

However, according to the evidence evidence No. 6, in the case of divorce and consolation money (2014da104188) between the plaintiff and the defendant, the plaintiff and the defendant are separately married, while maintaining legal marital relationship: Provided, That where the defendant violates the matters to be observed under the mediation protocol during the separate period, he/she shall obtain divorce at any time at the time when the plaintiff's claim for divorce is filed, and if a divorce is made, the defendant shall not raise any objection against the plaintiff's disposal of the real estate recorded in the text and the repayment of the secured property and shall not claim for division of property (after the plaintiff and the defendant, they have divorced on August 6, 2015 pursuant to the aforementioned adjustment clause).

Therefore, since the defendant bears the obligation to repay the real estate deposited in the disposition by the plaintiff, it cannot be recognized that the defendant has the right to possess the real estate.

3. If so, the plaintiff's claim is reasonable and accepted.