1. The lawsuit of this case shall be dismissed.

2. The costs of retrial shall be borne by the defendant;

purport, purport, ..

1. The following facts, which have become final and conclusive in the judgment subject to a retrial, are apparent or apparent in records in this court:

The Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the Defendant seeking restitution of unjust enrichment with Seoul Central District Court Decision 201Da212251, and on December 14, 2011, the court of first instance rendered a judgment accepting the Plaintiff’s claim in full.

B. The Defendant dissatisfied with this and appealed as Seoul Central District Court 2012Na807, and the appellate court changed the first instance judgment on June 19, 2014 and rendered a judgment dismissing the remainder of the claims.

C. The Plaintiff and the Defendant appealed to the Supreme Court Decision 2014Da44932, respectively. The Supreme Court accepted the Plaintiff and the Defendant’s appeal on October 30, 2014, respectively, and reversed and remanded the said appellate judgment.

The appellate court rendered a judgment that partly accepted the plaintiff's claim and dismissed the remaining claim by modifying the first instance court's judgment according to the purport of reversal and transmission of the Supreme Court's judgment and the plaintiff's

(Seoul Central District Court Decision 2014Na60155 decided June 26, 2015, hereinafter referred to as "Seoul Central District Court Decision") e.

On October 29, 2015, the defendant appealed to Supreme Court Decision 2015Da44229, but the Supreme Court dismissed the defendant's appeal on October 29, 2015.

F. Meanwhile, in the appellate proceedings after remanding, the defendant acquired the ownership of the site upon receipt of the certificate of completion inspection pursuant to the Act on Special Measures for Arrangement of Specific Buildings (amended by Act No. 3719, Dec. 31, 1983; hereinafter “Specific Building Act”) from an unauthorized building upon the delivery of the certificate of completion inspection pursuant to Article 3719, and the defendant purchased F, D, F, and D, of the land in Gwanak-gu, Seoul Special Metropolitan City (hereinafter “instant land”), thereby not subject to the collection of indemnity pursuant to Article 72(1)1 of the State Property Act. The defendant is in accordance with Article 245(2) of the Civil Act.