1. The claim for extradition regarding each real estate listed in the separate sheet among the instant lawsuits shall be dismissed.

2. The defendant.

1. Determination on the part demanding removal of a facility

A. The description of the claim is as shown in the annexed sheet of claim.

(b) Judgment on deemed confession based on recognition (Article 208 (3) 2, the main sentence of Article 150 (3) and the main sentence of paragraph (1) of the Civil Procedure Act);

2. Where a judgment on the legitimacy of the claim for extradition of real estate is examined, and a final and conclusive favorable judgment has res judicata effect on the final and conclusive judgment, where a party who received the final and conclusive judgment in favor of a party in a lawsuit again files a lawsuit against the other party in the previous final and conclusive judgment, the subsequent lawsuit is unlawful as there is no benefit

(See Supreme Court Decisions 87Meu1761 Decided November 10, 1987, and 2005Da74764 Decided April 14, 2006, etc.) In light of the above legal principles, according to each of the above, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the Defendant for the delivery, etc. of each real estate listed in the separate sheet as Cheongju District Court Decision 2019Da572 Decided May 30, 2019 (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 87Da1761, Nov. 10, 198; 2005Da74764, Apr. 14, 2006). According to the above legal principles, the part of the claim for the delivery of real estate among the instant lawsuit in this case is unlawful because there is no benefit of protection of rights.