1. The Defendant connects the Plaintiff with each point of the attached Table 5 to 8 and 5, among the land size of 561 square meters in Yangyang-si.

Comprehensively taking account of the respective descriptions and arguments in Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 4, the defendant leased the land listed in the Disposition No. 1 from D on April 4, 2014, and the above-ground restaurant building (hereinafter “instant land, etc.”) as deposit money of KRW 30 million, monthly rent of KRW 1 million, and the period from April 4, 2014 to April 3, 2016. The plaintiff acquired the ownership of the land listed in the Disposition No. 1 (hereinafter “instant land”) and the above-ground restaurant building, etc. from D on August 11, 2014; the defendant may recognize the fact that the lease contract of the instant building, etc., located in the Disposition No. 1, which is necessary for restaurant business, was renewed and terminated (hereinafter “instant building, etc.”).

According to the above facts of recognition, it can be seen that the above charcoal, which the defendant established, was consistent with the land of this case and owned by the plaintiff.

Therefore, the Defendant is obligated to deliver the instant building, etc. to the Plaintiff and pay unjust enrichment calculated by the ratio of KRW 1 million per month from April 4, 2019 to the completion date of delivery of the instant building, etc. from April 4, 2019 to April 4.

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim is reasonable, and it is decided as per Disposition.