1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

Purport of claim and appeal

1...

With respect to this case cited by the judgment of the court of first instance, the reasoning of this court is as follows, except where the defendant added the following judgments as to the assertion that the defendant repeats, and therefore, it is identical to the entry of the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance.

further determination

A. The main point of the Defendant’s assertion was K actually constructed, and only the Defendant lent the building permit only in the name of the building permit.

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim based on the premise that the defendant is the owner of the building of this case is without merit.

B. The confession during a trial is a statement of facts unfavorable to himself/herself, consistent with the allegations by the other party on the date for pleading or at the date for preparatory pleading, and once a confession during a trial is established, the court is bound to this effect unless it has been legally revoked. Thus, the court cannot admit by evidence that the confession and the facts contrary to the facts established in relation to the non-contentious facts between the parties are inconsistent (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 87Meu804, Oct. 24, 1988). The party revoking the confession is not presumed to be a confession due to an error in addition to the fact that the confession is contrary to the truth, as well as the fact that the confession is proved to be contrary to the truth

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2009Da84288, 84295, Feb. 11, 2010; Supreme Court Decision 2012Da86048, Jun. 27, 2013). In this case, the Defendant stated that “the Defendant owns the instant building and recognizes the possession of each of the instant real estate” on the first day for pleading of the first instance court, and this constitutes a confession in court as to major facts.

Although the defendant asserts that the confession is against the truth and thus revoked, the evidence submitted by the defendant alone is insufficient to recognize that the confession is against the truth, and it is caused by mistake.