1. The defendant shall deliver to the plaintiff the real estate stated in the attached list.

2. The costs of the lawsuit are assessed against the defendant.

3...

1. Basic facts

A. On October 30, 1989 with respect to the real estate listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant real estate”), the registration of ownership transfer was completed on January 30, 1991 under the Plaintiff’s name.

B. On September 9, 1993, C, who is the Plaintiff, is currently pending in a divorce lawsuit, following the Defendant’s filing of a suit against C, including divorce and consolation money, with the Seoul Family Court 2018Ddan34109, which was the Plaintiff’s satise, as the husband and wife reported to the Defendant on September 9, 1993.

C. Meanwhile, the Plaintiff, prior to the above divorce lawsuit, allowed the Plaintiff to reside in the instant real estate for the economic condition and stable marital life of the married couple, and accordingly, the Defendant currently occupies the instant real estate.

Any disposition document, such as a contract, was not presented to the argument of this case regarding the relationship of use as stated in the preceding paragraph.

[Ground of recognition] A without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 4, Eul evidence Nos. 1 through 7, and the court's order to submit financial transaction information to D Co., Ltd. and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination:

A. According to the relevant legal principles and Article 613(2) of the Civil Act, if the duration of the obligation to deliver real estate is not determined at the loan for use, the borrower shall return the object at the time when the loan for use expires, but even if the loan for use is not completed in reality, the lender may terminate the contract at any time and claim the return of the borrowed object when the sufficient period for use expires. Whether sufficient period for use and profit has elapsed shall be determined based on whether it is reasonable to recognize the right to terminate the contract to the lender from an equitable standpoint, comprehensively taking into account the circumstances as at the time of the loan for use, the period of use and utilization of the borrower, and the circumstances that the lender needs to return, etc. (see Supreme Court Decision 201 Decided July 24,