1. The defendant

(a) deliver the real estate listed in the annex;

B. From July 28, 2014, the above A

subsection (b).

1. In full view of the overall purport of the pleadings as to Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, and 4-1, the following facts: ① A Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as "B") newly constructed and owned two Dong factories (hereinafter referred to as "the factory of this case") on the Seo-gu, Seo-gu, Incheon, D land, and Nadong (hereinafter referred to as "the real estate stated in the attached Form") on March 13, 2012, an auction procedure has been commenced against the factory of this case on March 13, 2012 (Seoul District Court E); ② The defendant asserted that he was operating the manufacturing company "F," by leasing the factory of this case on August 26, 2012, the lease deposit amount of KRW 20 million, KRW 20 million, KRW 2 million, KRW 2000,000, KRW 200,000, KRW 200,000, KRW 714,281.

2. The parties' assertion

A. The plaintiff: since the defendant occupies the factory operation of this case without any authority, it is obligated to deliver it to the plaintiff as the owner and return the unjust enrichment from the possession of the rent party.

B. Defendant: (a) the instant factory operation was leased and used by G from G; and (b) the Defendant used only a part of it by leasing it from G, and thus, it cannot respond to the Plaintiff’s request.

3. In full view of the purport of the entire pleadings in the statements or images of Gap evidence Nos. 4, 6 through 8 (including paper numbers), Eul evidence Nos. 3 and 4, the defendant was confirmed to operate the factory of this case in the status quo investigation conducted in the above auction procedure, and Eul was found to operate the manufacturing company with the trade name of "H" from the 144 square meters of the general steel structure of the building not yet registered, other than the presentation adjacent to the Dongdong, and the defendant also.