1. The Defendant shall deliver to the Plaintiff a total of 243.68 square meters of the branch floor among the buildings listed in the attached list.

2. The plaintiff's remainder.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On April 14, 2009, the Plaintiff entered into a lease agreement with C on a lease agreement with the term of KRW 10 million for rental deposit, KRW 80,000,000 for rent monthly, KRW 50,000 for management expenses, and the term of lease from May 21, 2009 to May 20, 2010 for lease.

B. On September 26, 2017, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against C seeking the delivery of the instant building and the payment of unjust enrichment equivalent to the rent or the rent, although C did not pay the rent and the management fee properly.

(2017Gadan19860) c.

On July 12, 2018, this Court rendered a judgment in favor of the Plaintiff that “C delivers the instant building to the Plaintiff and pays the money calculated at the rate of KRW 8,50,000 per month from March 21, 2016 to the completion date of delivery of the said building” was determined as the withdrawal of appeal.

Accordingly, the Plaintiff attempted to enforce the above extradition judgment on July 31, 2019, but the actual possessor of the instant building appears to be the spouse C, which was impossible to execute on the ground that the actual possessor of the instant building appears to be the spouse C.

[Ground of recognition] The fact that there is no dispute, entry of Gap's 1 through 3, purport of whole pleading

2. Determination

A. According to the above facts as to the request for extradition, the defendant is obligated to deliver the above building to the plaintiff, unless he proves his possessory power over the building in this case.

Since a new lease contract was concluded between the Plaintiff, C and the Defendant on January 2020 on the condition that the rent of KRW 300,000 per month (the increase of KRW 500,000 from 201 to December 30, 2020) and the deposit of KRW 10,000,000 (payment to December 30, 2020), the Defendant asserted that the said building has the right to possess the said building. However, there is no evidence supporting the conclusion of the lease contract claimed by the Defendant, and thus the Defendant’

B. As to the claim for damages equivalent to the rent, the Plaintiff suffered damages equivalent to the rent of KRW 850,000 per month due to the Defendant’s illegal occupation.