1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, KRW 26,532,320 against the Plaintiff and the Plaintiff’s incidental thereto on January 9, 2013.

1. Basic facts

A. On January 20, 2010, the Defendant: (a) awarded a successful bid for a parcel of land A, 735.76 square meters (hereinafter “instant commercial building”); (b) on February 23, 2010, the Defendant completed the registration of ownership transfer for the instant commercial building on April 28, 2010.

B. On November 28, 2011, the Defendant filed a lawsuit against the Plaintiff seeking return of unjust enrichment on November 26, 2014, on the ground that the Plaintiff occupied and used the part of exclusive ownership amounting to 86.08 square meters among the instant commercial buildings with Nonparty D, a third party, by means of leasing and receiving monthly rent. On November 28, 201, the Defendant was rendered a favorable judgment against the Plaintiff on November 26, 2014. While the Plaintiff appealed as the District Court 2014Na15829, the Defendant appealed as the District Court 2015Da35355, the lower judgment was dismissed on May 15, 2015, and the final judgment became final and conclusive after being sentenced to the final judgment of dismissal of the Supreme Court on September 25, 2015.

【Ground of recognition】 The fact that there has been no dispute, Gap 2, 21, and 22, the purport of the whole pleadings and arguments

2. According to the reasoning of the judgment on the cause of the claim, the amount equivalent to the management fees and late payment fees cannot be recognized as 30,165,070 won among the grounds of the judgment of the court of first instance, in light of the description of the claim and the application for change of cause, which was submitted by the Plaintiff to the court of first instance, from April 201 to November 2014, calculated by subtracting the area equivalent to 86.08 square meters of the portion occupied and used by the Plaintiff from the area equivalent to the section for exclusive use owned and used by the Plaintiff among the instant commercial buildings (it appears to be a clerical error in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, “from May 9, 2011 to June 2012) and the amount equivalent to the late payment fees and late payment damages, barring any special circumstance, the Defendant is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff the aforementioned unpaid management fees and late payment damages.

3. Judgment on the defendant's defense

A. The Plaintiff occupied and used the portion of exclusive ownership of 86.08 square meters among the instant commercial buildings in question, thereby occupying and using the corresponding portion of 51.98 square meters.