1. The Defendant shall deliver to the Plaintiff, Yangyang-gu, Yangyang-gu, Seoul, No. 102, No. 1802.

2. The costs of the lawsuit are assessed against the defendant.

1. In full view of the purport of the entire pleadings as to the cause of the claim No. 1-3, the Plaintiff, on May 19, 2014, completed the registration of ownership transfer after being entrusted with an apartment complex as indicated in the order from C Urban Environment Improvement Association (hereinafter “instant apartment complex”), and the Defendant may recognize the possession of the instant apartment from August 2014.

According to the above facts of recognition, the defendant is obligated to deliver the apartment of this case to the plaintiff unless it proves the legitimate source of right to possess the apartment.

2. As to the Defendant’s assertion, the Defendant lent KRW 60 million, including personnel expenses, to D, who is the lien holder of the apartment of this case. The Defendant asserts that the Defendant’s possession of the apartment of this case is justifiable as it occupied the apartment of this case with D’s consent to receive the above money.

On the other hand, the money that the defendant lent to D cannot be deemed as a claim arising in relation to the apartment of this case. Thus, there is no room for the defendant to establish a lien on the apartment of this case, and if D is the lien holder of the apartment of this case, as alleged by the defendant, it is entitled to occupy D, and D consented to the defendant's possession.

The defendant's possession cannot be justified in relation to the plaintiff.

The defendant's argument is without merit.

3. The plaintiff's claim is justified, and this is accepted.