1. The plaintiff's claim against the defendants is dismissed.

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

1. The Plaintiff’s assertion made an agreement with the Defendants to operate a restaurant as a partnership business, and the agreement with the Defendants was reached during the process of accepting and operating the restaurant from D Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “D”) which operated the restaurant in the instant real estate. The Defendants are obligated to deliver the instant real estate to the Plaintiff as they did not have the title to possess it. The Defendants are jointly obligated to return unjust enrichment worth KRW 13.5 million per month as a result of the possession and use of the instant real estate until transferring it to the Plaintiff.

2. According to the overall purport of evidence Nos. 1 through 6 of the judgment, the Plaintiff and the Defendants agreed to operate the restaurant with the Defendants as a partnership business on July 2014, but the acquisition fund and the internal test cost are to be borne by the Plaintiff, and the operation of the restaurant is to be borne by the Defendant B. On October 27, 2014, the Plaintiff acquired all of the restaurant and related facilities from D who operated the restaurant from the instant real estate, which was owned by the NAF, on October 27, 2014. Defendant B, the location of the instant real estate on November 13, 2014, registered the business with the name of “E” and operated the restaurant from around that time, and the Plaintiff and the Defendants agreed to terminate the agreement on the operation of the restaurant around July 23, 2015.

However, there is no evidence to acknowledge that the Plaintiff has legitimate authority to seek delivery of the instant real estate against the Defendants. Thus, the Plaintiff’s above assertion is without merit without any need to further examine.

3. In conclusion, the plaintiff's claim against the defendants is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.