1. The defendant shall deliver to the plaintiff the building indicated in the attached list.

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

3...

1. Basic facts

A. On January 26, 199, the Plaintiff entered into a lease agreement (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”) with E on real estate listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant building”). Under the instant lease agreement, the Plaintiff may cancel or terminate the instant lease agreement or refuse to renew the contract in cases where E transfers the right of lease to another person in violation of the Rental Housing Act or subleases the leased house to another person.

B. On January 26, 1999, during the term of the instant lease agreement, E entered into a sales contract with the Defendant for the right to lease and purchase of apartments on the instant building without the Plaintiff’s consent, and the Defendant thereafter occupies the instant building upon delivery from E.

C. On August 27, 2014 and December 18, 2014, the Plaintiff notified the termination of the instant lease agreement on the grounds of the transfer of the right of lease without permission.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, Eul evidence Nos. 1 and 7 (including paper numbers), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. According to the facts of the judgment on the ground of the plaintiff's claim, the sales contract for the lease of the above apartment is a lease transfer contract, and since the plaintiff terminated the lease contract of this case on the ground of the lease transfer without permission, the defendant is obligated to deliver the building of this case to the plaintiff, barring special circumstances.

B. The defendant asserts that the defendant's implied consent as to the defendant's argument 1,00, transferred the right of lease to the defendant and the defendant moved into the building of this case around January 1, 199. The plaintiff knowingly recognized the defendant as a lessee without any objection for a long time, and the defendant did not fully recognize that the transfer of the right of lease was illegal, and therefore, he cannot respond to the plaintiff's claim.

According to the statements in the evidence Nos. 1 and 7, the defendant is the defendant.