1. The defendant shall be the plaintiff.

(a) Appendix 2 of the buildings listed in paragraph 2 of the same Schedule on the land listed in Annex 1;

Facts of recognition

The defendant related to the ownership and possession of real estate, as an agricultural partnership corporation, was granted subsidies from the administrative agency in around 2015 and constructed a building listed in Paragraph 2 of the attached Table (hereinafter “instant building”) on the ground specified in Paragraph 1 of the attached Table (hereinafter “instant land”) and completed the registration of ownership preservation.

In the register of the building of this case, additional registration was made in order to prohibit the use or disposal of the building of this case in violation of the purpose of granting subsidies until December 16, 2025.

On October 2019, the Plaintiff was awarded a successful bid in the auction procedure and completed the registration of ownership transfer.

The instant building, such as the indication of the “A” portion of the attached Form, is a site for which 280 square meters of the instant land is located.

The annual rent per 208 square meter of the instant land is KRW 508/m2. Of the instant land, the annual rent for the instant part of the instant building site is KRW 142,240 (=280 square meter x 508 won).

【In light of the fact that there is no dispute, Gap's evidence Nos. 1 through 2 (including the number of branch numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply), Eul's evidence Nos. 1 through 4, and the court's entrustment of appraisal by the Korea Land Information Corporation's branch, and appraiser D with each appraisal commission, the court's finding of the ground for appeal as to the ground for appeal claim as to the whole purport of pleading, the defendant removed the part "A" in the attached drawing among the buildings of this case from the plaintiff, and has a duty to return unjust enrichment equivalent to the rent for the above part of the land of this case.

On the other hand, the plaintiff's assertion seeking removal of the above part is not accepted, since the above part of the building is not constructed on the ground of the land of this case.

The summary of the defendant's argument regarding the defendant's assertion is that the defendant received subsidies and newly built the building of this case, and the use and disposition of the building in violation of the purpose of granting subsidies until December 16, 2025 at the time of registration of ownership preservation.