1. The plaintiff (Counterclaim defendant)'s main claim is dismissed.

2. The Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) shall list the attached list to the Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff).

1. As to the main claim

A. 1) On July 23, 1983, the Plaintiff maintained a de facto marital relationship with the deceased as well as the net C (hereinafter “the deceased”), and the deceased maintained a de facto marital relationship with the Plaintiff on the real estate stated in the separate sheet. After the deceased’s death on December 12, 1988, the Plaintiff resided in the building indicated in the separate sheet and showed a female life. After the deceased’s death, the Defendant, who is the inheritor of the deceased, wanted to pay KRW 30 million for the Plaintiff to be able to board a director even in single partitions. 2) The Plaintiff used the entire property that was gathered during that period.

The Deceased managed all profits generated in the field of dry production for 6 years living together with the deceased, and the deceased did not receive any compensation or reward for the above profits and labor contributions. Therefore, the consolation money or compensation corresponding thereto shall be demanded.

B. The video of the evidence No. 3(s) is insufficient to recognize the Plaintiff and the Deceased as a de facto marital relationship. Even if a de facto marital relationship was in a de facto marital relationship, inheritance rights as a spouse are not recognized. The Plaintiff’s assertion is without merit, since there is no legal basis for the claim of the director’s expenses and earnings, consolation money or compensation claim corresponding to the portion of the labor contribution, which corresponds to the portion of the labor contribution.

2. According to the overall purport of the evidence Nos. 1 through 4 as to the counterclaims, the deceased, his father, owned each real estate listed in the separate sheet, and died on or around December 28, 198, and the defendant inherited each real estate listed in the separate sheet, and the defendant allowed the plaintiff to reside in each real estate listed in the separate sheet for three years on or around December 198, and the plaintiff can be acknowledged as having occupied until the date on which the period expires.

Therefore, the plaintiff is obligated to deliver each real estate listed in the attached list to the defendant who is the owner.

3. Conclusion.