1. The defendant points out to the selected parties C, among the buildings on the ground D of the Siljin-si, the indication of the attached drawing(s), b, c, d, and Ga.

1. Basic facts

A. E and the Appointor C, each of whom is the wife of the Plaintiff (Appointed Party) shall own 1/2 shares of the D major 657 square meters per Jin-si.

B. On the ground of the above D land, there is an unauthorized building, and the Defendant occupies the part (a) in the ship stated in paragraph (1) of this Article (hereinafter “instant house”).

[Reasons for Recognition] The entry of Gap evidence No. 2 and the purport of the whole argument

2. The parties' assertion

A. The Plaintiff (Appointed Party) and the Appointed C (hereinafter collectively referred to as “Plaintiffs”) leased an unauthorized building that had existed since the purchase of the said D land to F.

F has sub-leased the part corresponding to the instant house of the above building to the Defendant without permission of the Plaintiffs, and the Plaintiffs later and later accepted the said sub-lease verbally by the Defendant that the said sub-lease is one million won.

However, the defendant's arbitrary unjust enrichment against the third party, and the rent has not been given since April 1, 2016.

The Defendant is obligated to deliver the instant housing which is the object leased to the Plaintiffs and pay the amount equivalent to the overdue rent and unjust enrichment after April 1, 2016.

B. The defendant's assertion is that the plaintiff (appointed party) is gathered.

Around May 2010, the Defendant heard that the Defendant would use the instant house to the Selection C, and paid KRW 1 million per annum to the Plaintiff, using the original warehouse at KRW 8.57,000,000 as the repair cost, as the office or residence. The rent from the year 2016 was not paid.

The defendant shall be entitled to return the above repair cost of 8.57 million won as beneficial cost.

3. The Plaintiff (Appointed Party) entered into a lease agreement with the Defendant solely on the basis of the written evidence Nos. 1 and 2 as to the Plaintiff’s claim of the Plaintiff (Appointed Party)

It is not sufficient to acknowledge that a sub-lease contract with the defendant as a lessor has been accepted, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it.

The Plaintiff (Appointed Party) is the instant case.