beta
Text
1. The defendant
(a) deliver apartment buildings listed in the separate sheet;
B. From February 27, 2015, delivery of the above apartment.
Reasons
1. Determination on the cause of the claim
A. On September 207, 207, the provisional registration of the right to claim ownership transfer was completed on the apartment as indicated in the attached list of the facts of recognition (hereinafter “the apartment of this case”). On May 16, 2008, the Plaintiff transferred the provisional registration under the name C on May 16, 2008, and completed the principal registration of ownership transfer due to payment in kind on February 26, 2015, the Defendant occupied the apartment of this case; the fact that the monthly rent of the apartment of this case was equivalent to 566,660 won as of February 27, 2015 that did not conflict between the parties, or that the fact that the monthly rent of the apartment of this case was not 56,660 won as of February 27, 2015 is not a dispute between the parties, or that of this court’s appraisal as of the date of the appraisal of the appraisal of the appraisal corporation
B. According to the above facts of recognition, the defendant is obligated to deliver the apartment of this case to the plaintiff, barring any special circumstances. The defendant is obligated to pay the plaintiff the unjust enrichment equivalent to the rent, calculated at the rate of KRW 566,60 per month from February 27, 2015 to the completion date of delivery of the above apartment, which is the following day after the plaintiff acquired ownership of the above apartment, as requested by the plaintiff.
2. The defendant's assertion that the defendant had a claim for the construction cost against D (hereinafter "D"), and that the defendant transferred 6 bonds including the apartment of this case to D in lieu of the repayment of the above claim. At the time, the defendant was also liable for the loan amounting to KRW 200,000 against the plaintiff, so the registration of ownership transfer for the apartment of this case was completed in order to secure the repayment, and the actual owner of the apartment of this case still has the right to possess the above apartment of this case as the defendant.
According to each of the evidence Nos. 4, 7, 9, and 1 through 3, the apartment of this case between D and the defendant in lieu of paying the construction price to the defendant.