1. Defendant B occupies each real estate listed in the separate sheet 1 and 2 from March 22, 2019 to the Plaintiff.

1. Facts recognized;

A. The Plaintiff and the Defendants are owners of 1/3 shares of each real estate listed in the separate sheet Nos. 1 and 2 (hereinafter “each of the instant real estate”).

The acquisition date of the Plaintiff’s share is March 22, 2019.

B. Defendant B had been exclusively occupying and using each of the instant real estate since before acquiring the Plaintiff’s ownership of the said shares until now.

C. Of the monthly rent from March 22, 2019 for each of the instant real property, an amount equivalent to 1/3 of the monthly rent is KRW 160,000 per month.

Plaintiff

The Defendants did not agree on the method of dividing each of the instant real estate jointly owned by the Defendants.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence Nos. 1 to 3, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. The determination of the claim for return of unjust enrichment is that a co-owner may use and benefit from all the co-owners at the ratio of shares, and the matters concerning the management of the co-owned property are determined by a majority of shares of co-owners. Thus, if one of the co-owners exclusively occupies and uses the jointly-owned property without the consent of a majority of shares among the co-owners as to the method of using and benefit from the jointly-owned property, then the other co-owners shall make unjust enrichment corresponding to their shares (see Supreme Court Decision 2006Da49307, 49314, Nov. 24, 2006). According to the above facts, the Defendant B has exclusively occupied and used each of the real property of this case from March 22, 2019, which is the date of acquisition of the Plaintiff’s ownership until the date of acquisition of the above shares, and there is no evidence to deem that there was an agreement between the majority of shares of co-owners as to the exclusive possession and use thereof, Defendant B is obligated to pay unjust enrichment to the Plaintiff.

B. As to the claim for partition of co-owned property in this case, the Plaintiff and the Defendants, who are co-owners of each real estate in this case, agree on partition method