1. The defendant shall deliver to the plaintiff the second floor office 162.46m2 among the buildings listed in the attached list.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Plaintiff, as the owner of the building indicated in the attached list, occupied and used the second floor office of the above building (hereinafter “instant office”) free of charge since 1997.

B. On July 21, 2016, the Plaintiff filed an application against the Defendant for a provisional injunction against access with the Gwangju District Court Decision 2016Kahap1033, and the said court rendered a provisional injunction against access by the Defendant on July 21, 2016.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 11-1, Gap evidence 14, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. According to the above facts of determination as to the cause of claim, the plaintiff entered into a loan agreement with the defendant for use without fixing a period of time with respect to the office of this case, the defendant used the office of this case for a long period of not less than 20 years without compensation, and the relationship between the plaintiff and the defendant and the relationship of trust or friendship between the plaintiff and the defendant is deemed to have been weak. Thus, the plaintiff can terminate the loan agreement with the defendant under Article 613(2) of the Civil Code.

Therefore, the loan agreement between the Plaintiff and the Defendant is deemed to have been lawfully terminated on June 30, 2016, when the copy of the complaint of this case containing the Plaintiff’s expression of intention of termination was delivered to the Defendant. Therefore, the Defendant is obligated to deliver the instant office to the Plaintiff, barring any special circumstance.

3. Judgment on the defendant's assertion

A. In order to reside in the instant office, the Defendant asserted that the Plaintiff could not respond to the Plaintiff’s claim until receiving beneficial expenses, on the grounds that the floor construction, partitions construction, tent construction, boiler construction, boiler construction, steel mold, and double window construction, etc. were carried out on two occasions in around 2012, and that the Defendant could not respond to the Plaintiff’s claim until receiving beneficial expenses.

B. The duty to reimburse the 1 beneficial cost and the duty to deliver real estate are not arising from the same bilateral contract, and it cannot be deemed as a quid pro quo obligation.