beta
Text
1. The defendant shall receive KRW 7,000,000 from the plaintiff and at the same time enter in the attached list to the plaintiff.
Reasons
1. Comprehensively taking account of the purport of the entire arguments in Gap 1 through 5’s statement as to the cause of the claim, the facts in the separate sheet are acknowledged (On the other hand, regarding the reconstruction improvement project of this case, the management and disposal plan was authorized and publicly announced June 9, 2016). Therefore, the defendant who possesses real estate in the separate sheet located within the reconstruction improvement project zone of this case (hereinafter “the instant real estate”) is obligated to deliver the instant real estate to the plaintiff who acquired the right to use and benefit from the instant real estate as the project implementer.
2. The defendant's assertion that the defendant cannot respond to the plaintiff's claim since he did not receive the beneficial expenses equivalent to 7 million won and 11 million won of the rental deposit.
(B) The Defendant is the spouse of Nonparty C (name D prior to the opening of name), and C entered into a lease agreement with E, the owner of the instant real estate, and it is recognized that C and the Defendant jointly occupy the instant real estate. Thus, the Defendant’s simultaneous performance defense with the return of the lease deposit amount of KRW 7 million among the above assertion is reasonable, in full view of the purport of the entire arguments presented in the instant case.
(However, since the parties to the above lease contract are Nonparty C, the right to receive the lease deposit is also C). However, the evidence submitted in this case alone is insufficient to admit the defendant's assertion of beneficial costs, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge this, so this part of the defendant's assertion is not examined and rejected.
3. Ultimately, the Defendant is obligated to deliver the instant real estate to the Plaintiff at the same time with the payment of the lease deposit of KRW 7 million by Nonparty C from the Plaintiff.
If so, the plaintiff's claim of this case is accepted within the above scope of recognition, and remainder.