1. The defendant is against the plaintiffs:

A. Of the area of 1,200 square meters prior to Seosan-si, each point of the attached Form 1,2,3,4, and 1 shall be in sequence.

Description of Claim

On September 10, 2018, the Plaintiffs completed the registration of ownership transfer with respect to each of the shares of 1/2 of D 1,200 square meters (hereinafter “instant land”).

The Defendant owned, on the instant land, the building indicated in Section 1 (A) of the Disposition No. 1 (hereinafter “instant building”) and occupied and used all of the instant land.

On the other hand, the monthly rent of the instant land after September 1, 2018 is KRW 100,000.

Therefore, the Defendant is obligated to remove the instant building to the Plaintiffs, deliver the instant land, and pay unjust enrichment equivalent to the rent calculated by the ratio of KRW 100,000 per 10,000 (per 50,000 won per 1 Plaintiff) per month from September 11, 2018 to the date the Defendant terminated the occupation of the instant land or the date the Plaintiffs lose their ownership of the instant land, whichever comes first.

2. Judgment without holding any pleadings (Articles 208 (3) 1 and 257 (1) of the Civil Procedure Act);

3. The grounds for partial dismissal of the Plaintiffs filed a claim against the Defendant for unjust enrichment regarding the use of the instant land from September 11, 2018 to the completion date of removal of the instant building. However, in order to render a judgment ordering performance in the future, not only the fulfillment date of an obligation but also the continuation of the cause for nonperformance of an obligation until the time of the closing of argument shall be determined at the time of the closing of argument (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 86Meu2151, Sept. 22, 1987). The Plaintiffs may lose their ownership over the instant land before the Defendant removes the instant building, and the removal of the instant building and delivery of the instant land are distinguishable from the concept of the removal of the instant building. Thus, seeking restitution of unjust enrichment with the completion date of removal of the instant building cannot be permitted as a lawsuit for future performance.

However, the above purport of the plaintiffs' claim is to return unjust enrichment until the date of arrival of the plaintiffs' loss of ownership or the defendant's expiration date of occupation.