1. On the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant),

A. The Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) and the Defendant shall attach attached Table 766.2 square meters on the Magdae-gu, Ansan-si.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On September 15, 2005, the Plaintiff permitted the Defendant Counterclaim Plaintiff (hereinafter “Defendant Lessee”) to use the part of the building area as public property among the building area of 1-B and the land of 1-B and the land of 1-B, and the permission for use between them was renewed and terminated on May 31, 2009.

B. Defendant B, as the representative of the Defendant church, uses some of the buildings as a wedding for the dwelling of the family members.

[Evidence: Evidence No. 4, 5, 6, and 7

2. The defendant church in charge of the judgment on the principal lawsuit has expired, and thus the subject matter should be delivered, except in extenuating circumstances.

The plaintiff asserts that the whole parcel of land exceeds the area of the site where the building is built and the defendant church uses the whole parcel of land as an original object of permission for use, and there is insufficient evidence to acknowledge it.

The delivery of a site on which a building is built is not only achieved by the delivery of a building, but also by drawing in the entire site, so the delivery of a building is accepted only because it was not specified by drawing.

Since Defendant B uses part of this building for residential purpose with his family and residence, it must be removed.

On the other hand, container stuffs, such as the attached photo, are used as the accessories to the church building (A), and since the church building is used for the purpose of the worship of the defendant church and for the residence of the defendant B, container stuffs are recognized as being provided for this purpose.

Therefore, the defendants must be collected.

3. Judgment on counterclaim

A. The plaintiff claiming the defendant church, as a lessor of the lease, has the duty to preserve and repair the leased object so that the lessee can use it in accordance with the purpose of the lease (Article 623 of the Civil Act), but the defendant church, as the lessee, has not fulfilled its duty to preserve and repair the leased object (Article 623 of the Civil Act) and failed to perform so that the defendant church, as the lessee, can use it, for the purpose of the lease, 3,100,000 won, roof repair cost, 9,000,000 won, and