1. The Defendant shall deliver to the Plaintiff the real estate listed in the separate sheet Nos. 2 through 4.

2. The plaintiff's remainder.

1. Basic facts

A. On February 28, 2018, the Plaintiff purchased each real estate (part of co-ownership shares) listed in the separate sheet in the Suwon District Court C real estate auction procedure (hereinafter “related auction procedure”) from Suwon District Court C, and completed the registration of ownership transfer on the same day.

1. 1/2 shares of 1/2 shares of 41 square meters among 1/2 shares of 1/2 shares of 41 square meters in 194 square meters in Hasung-si 194 square meters in Hasung-si 194 square meters in Hasung-si 225 square meters (the 2nd real estate in this case) (the 3rd real estate in this case) in 1/2 shares of 1/2 shares of 5 square meters in 194 square meters in Hasung-si 194 square meters in Hasung-si 194 square meters in Hasung-si 194 square meters in Hasung-si 17 square meters in Hasung-si 366 square meters in Hasung-si 3 (the 4nd real estate in this case) in 17 square meters in Hasung-

B. On July 2017, the Defendant reported a lien of KRW 35 million as the secured claim for the construction price of KRW 35 million with respect to each real estate of this case at the relevant auction procedure.

C. The Defendant currently installed containers on the ground of the third real estate of this case, and occupied each real estate of this case 2 to 4, and refused the Plaintiff’s request for delivery.

[Ground of recognition] A without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1-1-6, Gap evidence 2-1-1, result of on-site inspection by this court, purport of whole pleadings

2. The plaintiff of the claim portion concerning the real estate of this case Nos. 1, 5, and 6 is entitled to acquire each of the above real estate as the owner or co-owner of each of the above real estate under the premise that the defendant possessed each of the above real estate of this case Nos. 1, 5, and 6, but there is no evidence to prove that the defendant occupied

The plaintiff filed the lawsuit in this case with the plaintiff's claim for delivery of all the real estate purchased in the related auction procedure because the plaintiff did not specify the real estate for which the defendant had performed the construction work. However, both parties' arguments continue to exist and after the on-site inspection of this court was conducted, the parties' dispute