1. The Defendant shall leave the Plaintiff from the 3rd floor of 68 square meters among the real estate listed in the attached list.

2. The costs of the lawsuit are assessed against the defendant.

1. Determination as to the cause of claim

A. Facts of recognition 1) The Plaintiff is the Mapo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government C 85.6 square meters (hereinafter “instant land”).

(2) In the real estate auction procedure with respect to the pertinent land, the said land was awarded in full, and the sale price was fully paid on December 6, 2013, and the ownership transfer registration was completed on the 10th of the same month, and the ownership of the said real estate was acquired. 2) On the instant land, the real estate indicated in the attached list, which is an unregistered building (hereinafter “instant unauthorized building”) is constructed. The Plaintiff was rendered a favorable judgment on June 13, 2014 against D, who is the de facto owner of the said unauthorized building.

3) On June 25, 1995, the Defendant: (a) from D on June 25, 1995, the third floor of 68 square meters among the instant unauthorized buildings (hereinafter “instant real estate”).

) The lease deposit amount of KRW 10,00,00, monthly rent of KRW 160,000, the lease term of KRW 12 months from June 25, 1996, and since the completion of the resident registration transfer report on September 15, 1995, the above real estate has been occupied and used until the date of the closing of argument in this case. [Grounds for recognition: Gap: Evidence Nos. 1 through 3 and 5, Evidence No. 7-4, Evidence No. 7-1, Evidence No. 4, and Evidence No. 1, and each fact inquiry to the head of Mapo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, the purport of the entire pleadings, as a result of each fact inquiry to the head

B. According to the above facts of determination, since the building without permission in this case interferes with the Plaintiff’s exercise of land ownership, which is the owner of the land in this case, the Defendant who occupied and used the real estate in this case, which is part of the above unauthorized building, is obligated to leave the above real estate, barring special circumstances.

2. The defendant's argument on the defendant's assertion that since the defendant leased the real estate of this case from D on June 25, 1995 to KRW 10,000,000, monthly rent of KRW 160,000, and resided for about 20 years, he cannot respond to the plaintiff's claim until the refund of deposit for lease.

However, as seen earlier, the instant unauthorized building is the same.