1. The Defendants jointly do so to the Plaintiff:

(a) deliver each real estate listed in the separate sheet;

B. From June 27, 2018

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On June 27, 2018, the Plaintiff acquired the ownership of each real estate by winning the auction price and paying the proceeds from the sale of each real estate listed in the separate sheet in the real estate auction procedure.

B. The Defendants, as a mother and child, have resided in each of the above real estate before the Plaintiff acquired the Plaintiff’s ownership, and operated a restaurant.

C. From June 27, 2018 to June 27, 2018, the amount equivalent to the monthly rent for each of the above real estate is KRW 2,500,000.

[Reasons for Recognition: Facts without dispute, Gap evidence, result of appraisal of rent, purport of the whole pleadings]

2. The Defendants are jointly obligated to jointly deliver each of the above real estate to the Plaintiff, and pay the amount of unjust enrichment equivalent to the rent of KRW 2,500,000 per month from June 27, 2018 to the completion date of delivery.

3. Judgment on the defendants' assertion

A. Defendant B’s assertion on October 13, 2003, and as at the time, Defendant B entered into a lease agreement with the owner of each of the above real estate and each of the above real estate in KRW 200,00,000, and resided in each of the above real estate, Defendant B is a tenant with opposing power under the Housing Lease Protection Act, and Defendant C is an occupation assistant residing with Defendant B.

Therefore, the plaintiff cannot respond to the request.

B. In light of the following facts and circumstances, there is no dispute between the parties to the judgment, or the evidence of Gap 1 to 11, Eul 1 to 8, and the whole purport of the pleadings as a result of the order to submit financial transaction information to the E bank, it is difficult to view the defendant Eul as the genuine lessee of each of the above real estate. Thus, the defendants' assertion is without merit.

1) The lease contract (No. 2) that Defendant B prepared at the time of the conclusion of the lease contract cannot be confirmed as completed on October 13, 2003, which was actually written as the date of preparation due to the lack of the fixed date and the entry of the broker. The Defendants cannot be confirmed as to whether Defendant B was written on October 13, 2003. The amount of the lease deposit KRW 200,000,000, as the spouse of Defendant B at the time.