1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. Basic facts

A. The Defendant is the owner of the building constructed on the ground level 1 and 7 above ground level on Geumcheon-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government and D ground level.

B. On June 2015, the Defendant entered into a contract with F Co., Ltd. for the construction of the said building (hereinafter “instant construction”). On October 16, 2015, F entered into a subcontract for reinforced concrete construction works with G Co., Ltd. and the said construction.

C. On November 30, 2015, the Plaintiff entered into a lease agreement with G to October 31, 2016, the supply value of which is KRW 5,0490,000 from November 30, 2015 to October 31, 2016, and supplied the instant temporary materials to the instant construction site at that time.

F) On May 30, 2016, during the process of executing the instant construction project, the F renounced the said construction project, and accordingly, G’s reinforced concrete construction was also interrupted, and G was steeld at the construction site of this case around that time.

E. After that, the Defendant concluded a contract for the instant construction with H Co., Ltd., and H re-execution of the instant construction project from July 12, 2016 to November 1, 2016.

F. The instant temporary materials were returned to the Plaintiff on November 17, 2016.

[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap 3, 5, 6

2. Determination

A. The summary of the Plaintiff’s assertion (1) obtained benefits of KRW 46,052,204, which is an amount equivalent to the above temporary materials, without any legal cause, from July 2016 to November 17, 2016, and suffered damages equivalent to the same amount from the Plaintiff by occupying or using the instant temporary materials from July 2016 to November 17, 2016.

(2) In addition, during the above period, the defendant illegally occupied the temporary materials of this case, and during the period of possession by the defendant, the temporary materials equivalent to the market price of KRW 24,212,562 were destroyed.

(3) Therefore, the Defendant’s unjust enrichment amounting to KRW 70,264,766, total sum of the rent and the cost of the destroyed temporary materials to the Plaintiff.