1. The defendant shall deliver to the plaintiff the part of the building (the third floor of 94.64 square meters) entered in the attached list.

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

1. Determination on both arguments

A. If the purport of the entire pleadings is added to each part of Gap 1-15 (including each number), the plaintiff leased the part of the building on the attached list (hereinafter referred to as the "part of the building of this case") from a patrolman on April 1995, and even though he has been able to maintain the lessee status until now, it can be recognized that the defendant currently occupies the building of this case. Thus, barring any special circumstance, the defendant is obligated to deliver the part of the building of this case to the plaintiff.

B. In regard to this, the defendant asserted that "(the part of the building in this case) paid to the building owner with the deposit of KRW 15 million, which is paid by the members of the Chhy's association, was paid with the money created as a unconstitutional contribution, and if the plaintiff sought a name order, it seems that he/she made a kind of simultaneous performance defense by asserting that the Chy's members among the above security deposit would return the part appropriated as a unconstitutional contribution as a religious person." However, even according to the above argument, even if the defendant's assertion is based on the above argument, it is difficult to view that the plaintiff has the duty to return 10 million won out of the lease security deposit for the part of the building in this case, the defendant's above assertion based on the different premise is not acceptable.

2. According to the conclusion, the Plaintiff’s claim of this case seeking the performance of the duty to deliver a building is accepted.