1. The defendant shall order the plaintiff to write down the real estate stated in the attached list.

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

3...

1. Basic facts

A. The real estate originally indicated in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant real estate”) is owned by the Plaintiff’s mother, the deceased, and C died on October 13, 2015, and the Plaintiff completed the registration of ownership transfer on October 21, 2015 by agreement and division.

B. At the time of the closing of the instant argument, the Defendant occupied and used the instant real estate.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap 1-1, 2, and 3, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. According to the above facts of determination as to the cause of the claim, the defendant is obligated to order the plaintiff to present the pertinent real estate, unless the defendant asserts and prove the legitimate source of right to possess the pertinent real estate.

B. As to the Defendant’s assertion, the Defendant and the deceased were in a de facto marital relationship, and the instant real estate were jointly acquired with the proceeds from the sale of the real estate acquired and disposed of while maintaining a de facto marital relationship, and the Defendant’s business income. As such, the instant real estate was only in the name of the deceased, and only in the name of the deceased, it is alleged that they share the real estate according to the ratio of the acquisition fund borne by the Defendant and the deceased, but each of the descriptions or images of the Defendant B and the deceased

In addition, it is difficult to recognize that the real estate of this case was jointly acquired, and in this case, the cause of the claim is against the defendant who occupied and used the real estate of this case as an exclusion of interference based on the ownership due to a consultation division. It is difficult to recognize that there is a legitimate source of right to refuse the plaintiff's request for clarification due to reasons such as the defendant's assertion. Thus, the defendant's assertion is without merit.

3. Conclusion.