1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

1...

1. Basic facts

A. On February 4, 2015, upon the application of Hartjin Co., Ltd., there was a decision to commence the auction to exercise the security right on each of the instant real estate (Seoul Eastern District Court G; hereinafter “instant auction procedure”), and the registration of the entry of the decision to commence the auction on the same day was completed.

B. On March 21, 2016, the Plaintiff received the sale of each of the instant real estate at the instant auction procedure, and acquired ownership by smelling the sale price on April 27, 2016.

C. In the instant auction procedure, the Defendant asserted that, at the instant auction procedure, the Plaintiff, who was a co-defendant of the first instance trial (hereinafter referred to as the “B church”) had a lien based on the claim for reimbursement of 230 million won for the instant building based on the beneficial and non-payment of the amount of KRW 230 million, and filed a report on the lien under the name of the B church, stating himself as a co-defendant of the B church.

In the first instance court, the Plaintiff filed a request for the delivery of each of the instant real estate against B during the school, but the first instance court dismissed the lawsuit against B school due to lack of evidence to prove that the B school association satisfies the requirements as an unincorporated association. This part of the first instance judgment became final and conclusive as it is.

E. On March 9, 2017, enforcement officers, based on the judgment of the first instance on which a sentence of provisional execution was attached, released the Defendant’s possession of the instant building and delivered it to the Plaintiff.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap 1 through 5, and Eul 9, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. The plaintiff's assertion is the owner of the building of this case, which purchased each of the real estate of this case in the auction procedure of this case, and the defendant occupies the building of this case as the standing pastor of the B church. Thus, the defendant is obligated to deliver the building of this case to

(B) The part of the Plaintiff’s claim for extradition of the instant site is dismissed in the first instance judgment, and is no longer subject to the judgment of this Court).

(1) The Defendant’s assertion (1) the possessor of the building of this case is the Bridge or B.