1. The defendant shall deliver to the plaintiff the apartment as stated in the attached list.

2. A subsidy shall accrue from among the costs of lawsuit;

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On May 19, 199, D completed the registration of ownership transfer for an apartment as indicated in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant apartment”) on May 19, 199, and on February 21, 201, D leased the apartment with a deposit of KRW 160 million and the term of lease fixed to the Defendant’s supplementary intervenor (hereinafter “participating”).

B. On February 2, 2012, D completed the registration of ownership transfer for the gift of the instant apartment on the ground of the gift, and reported the divorce on September 6, 2012.

C. Meanwhile, the Seoul Credit Guarantee Foundation filed a lawsuit seeking revocation of fraudulent act (Seoul Central District Court 2012 Gohap542796) against the above gift contract between D and E with the claim for indemnity against D as the right to be preserved, and won the case on August 29, 2013, and the said judgment became final and conclusive around that time.

The Seoul Credit Guarantee Foundation (F) returned to D the ownership of the apartment of this case, and applied for a compulsory auction of real estate (Seoul Central District CourtF). On October 24, 2013, the decision to commence auction was made.

E. On January 28, 2015, the Plaintiff was awarded a successful bid for the instant apartment at the above auction procedure and the same year.

3. 13. The registration of ownership transfer was made under the Plaintiff’s name.

F. As of the date of closing argument, the defendant occupies and uses the apartment of this case.

[Grounds for Recognition: Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, Gap evidence 2, Gap evidence 3, Gap evidence 5, Gap evidence 6, the purport of the whole pleadings]

2. According to the above facts of recognition as to the cause of the claim, the defendant is obligated to deliver the apartment to the plaintiff, the owner of the apartment of this case, unless there is a legitimate title to possess the apartment of this case.

3. Judgment on the defendant's simultaneous performance defense and plaintiff's assertion

A. The defendant's simultaneous performance defense is that since the defendant leased the apartment of this case from E to 15 billion won of the deposit, the defendant is obligated to deliver the apartment of this case only on the condition of return of the above deposit.

B. The plaintiff's assertion is as follows.