1. The part demanding delivery of the building among the counterclaim of this case shall be dismissed.

2. The defendant (Counterclaim plaintiff) is the Ga.

1. Basic facts

A. On July 3, 1974, the deceased A (hereinafter referred to as the “the deceased”) was appointed as a member of the Defendant church, but retired on March 3, 2008. While he was employed as the Defendant pastor, the registration of ownership transfer was completed on June 15, 1982 with respect to each land listed in the attached Table 1 (hereinafter referred to as “each land of this case”).

B. On October 14, 1982, each of the buildings listed in the separate sheet Nos. 1 and 2 on the real estate register and building register of each of the instant land in this case exist on each of the lands listed in the separate sheet No. 1 and 2 on each of the lands listed in the separate sheet No. 1, but according to the current status appraisal (Evidence No. 3 and No. 9), the building listed in the separate sheet No. 2 in the separate sheet No. 2 is confirmed to exist on each of the lands listed in the separate sheet No. 3 and No. 4,

On June 14, 1985, after obtaining a building permit under the name of the deceased, and building of 109.44 square meters on the 1st, Blue-dong 1,09.44 square meters among the buildings listed in the attached Table 2 list among the buildings listed in paragraph (1) and paragraph (2) in the attached Table 2 list, was used as a tool. On July 31, 1996, each building listed in the attached Table 2 list (hereinafter collectively referred to as the “instant building”) was completed by expanding the 109.44 square meters on the 1st, Blue-dong 1,096 to 220 square meters and expanding the 70 square meters of 2nd, Blue-dong

C. From around February 2004, the Deceased operated the instant building as “F Training Institute” while occupying the instant building, and had not been registered on December 28, 2007, as to the instant building under his name, and operated it as “G school” from February 2009.

On March 19, 2009, the defendant church filed a lawsuit against the deceased on the claim that the defendant church is the owner of the building in this case, claiming the preservation of ownership and the request for extradition of the building. On September 9, 2011, the judgment in favor of the appellate court was rendered on September 9, 201 (Seoul High Court Decision 2010Na24642), and on December 26, 2013, the judgment in the appellate court became final and conclusive.

(Supreme Court Decision 2011Da90194). E.

On the other hand.