1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. The plaintiff's assertion

A. On March 2016, the Plaintiff entered into a lease agreement with the Defendant regarding the real estate listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant real estate”). Around March 2016, the Plaintiff paid expenses equivalent to KRW 22,293,100 to the instant real estate, which increased the value of the instant real estate by rebuilding toilets, kitchens, kitchens, living rooms, etc., and building boilers, electricity, water supply, septic tanks, etc., and increased the value of the instant real estate. The Plaintiff is obligated to pay the Plaintiff the money paid by the Plaintiff pursuant to Articles 203(2) and 626(2) of the Civil Act or the increased amount thereof.

B. The Defendant filed a claim for return of unjust enrichment, which is the location of the pertinent real estate, requested KRW 10,00 won to the Plaintiff and transferred KRW 10,000 to the Defendant’s wife D’s account around May 2017, and the Defendant did not receive the said land. Thus, the Defendant is obliged to return the said KRW 10,000,000,000 acquired without any legal ground, as unjust enrichment.

2. Determination

A. We examine the determination on the claim for beneficial costs, and there is no evidence to prove that a lease agreement on the instant real estate was concluded between the Plaintiff and the Defendant (the Defendant, not the Plaintiff, to the effect that the instant real estate was leased to Nonparty E), and the Plaintiff’s claim for beneficial costs under Article 626(2) of the Civil Act on the premise that a lease agreement on the instant real estate was concluded between the Plaintiff and the Defendant, even if not, is not examined, is not reasonable

In addition, the possessor's right to claim reimbursement of beneficial costs against the person who restored the article 203 (2) of the Civil Code has the right to legally possess such right as the contractual relationship.