1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

The purport of the claim and the purport of the appeal:

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On March 30, 2001, the Plaintiff had resided in the deceased D and the instant house after completing the registration of ownership transfer with respect to the building listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant house”).

B. On February 25, 2018, the Defendant moved to the instant housing for the nursing of the network D, which was suffering from dementia on or around February 25, 2018, and has been occupied and used until now.

(c)

The deceased D was hospitalized in a convalescent hospital, etc. on July 17, 2018, and died on November 19, 2018, and the Plaintiff is out of the instant house on July 18, 2018 and is currently residing in other places.

[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence Nos. 1, Eul evidence Nos. 1, 2, 4, and 10, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination on the cause of the claim

A. According to the above facts as to the establishment of the lending contract between the Plaintiff and the Defendant, it is reasonable to view that the lending contract between the Plaintiff and the Defendant was concluded without setting the deadline for the Defendant to use and benefit from the instant building free of charge (hereinafter “the lending contract of this case”).

B. We examine whether the lending and lending contract of this case has been lawfully terminated, if the existing period has not been determined in terms of the lending and lending contract of this case, the borrower shall return the object at the time when the use and lending contract of this case has been terminated in accordance with the nature of the contract or the object, but even if the use and lending has not been completed in reality, the lender may terminate the contract at any time and claim the return of the borrowed object when the sufficient period has elapsed. Whether the sufficient period for the use and lending of this case has expired under Article 613(2) of the Civil Act is reasonable to recognize the termination right from the standpoint of fairness by comprehensively taking into account the circumstances at the time of the lending and lending contract of this case, the period of use and utilization of the borrower, and the circumstances which the lender