1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

1. In full view of the following facts: (a) evidence Nos. 1 and 2 as well as the testimony of the party witness C, the Plaintiff’s mother C entered into a lease agreement with the Defendant on June 23, 2005 on behalf of the Plaintiff on the part of the Defendant for the payment of KRW 15,000,000 among the obligations owed by him to the Defendant, with respect to the instant building owned by the Plaintiff, the amount of KRW 15,00,000,000, among the obligations owed by him to the Defendant; and (b) thereafter, the instant building did not reside in the Defendant but resided in the third party; and (c) the Defendant received the difference from the third party as the interest claim of the above claim against C

2. As alleged by the parties and the plaintiff, the defendant transferred the building of this case to a third party and occupied the building of this case indirectly. Since C fully repaid the debt of the above KRW 15,00,000 to the defendant, the defendant asserts that the defendant is obligated to deliver the building of this case to the plaintiff and return the unjust enrichment equivalent to the rent by the completion date of delivery.

In regard to this, the defendant asserted that the third party who resided in the building of this case was occupied in the building of this case under a lease agreement with the plaintiff or C, and the defendant only obtained rent from him, and it cannot be viewed as occupying the building of this case, and thus, the plaintiff cannot respond to the plaintiff's claim.

On the other hand, the witness C’s testimony, which corresponds to the fact that the Defendant transferred the instant building to a third party, is difficult to believe, and it is not sufficient to recognize only the entries in the evidence Nos. 3 and 13-1 through 5, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it. Thus, the Plaintiff’s assertion based on the premise that the Defendant occupied the instant building is without any need to further examine it.

3. Thus, the plaintiff's claim is dismissed as it is without merit, and the judgment of the court of first instance is just, and the plaintiff's appeal is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so ordered as per Disposition.