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...

Facts of recognition

C The registration of ownership transfer is completed on July 24, 2014 on the building of this case listed in the separate sheet on July 24, 2014 on the ground of sale as of July 8, 2014.

The registered titleholder of the building of this case was D.

On June 28, 2016, the Plaintiff entered into a contract to purchase the instant building from C with the purchase price of KRW 530 million, and paid all purchase price at that time, and completed the registration of ownership transfer on July 21, 2016.

The defendant is the mother of C and has been residing in the building of this case since before the plaintiff completed the registration of ownership transfer.

[Ground of recognition] The facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 9 (including additional numbers), and the facts of recognition of the grounds for the overall purport of the pleadings, the defendant is obligated to deliver them to the plaintiff who is the owner of the building of this case.

On July 8, 2014, the Defendant asserted that the sales contract between the Plaintiff and C on the instant building is null and void, since he purchased the instant building under the name of C, and completed the registration of ownership transfer under the name of C, and thereby, registered the title transfer to C, and C embezzled the instant building without permission by selling it to the Plaintiff without permission.

On the other hand, there is no evidence to acknowledge the defendant's assertion, and even according to the defendant's assertion, the title trust between the defendant and C constitutes a contractual title trust or an intermediate omission registration (third party title trust).

Since the type of title trust has been disposed of by C, anywhere, by which the title trustee falls.

It is the established precedent of the Supreme Court of Korea that embezzlement cannot be established.

On December 13, 2012, Supreme Court Decision 2010Do10515 Decided December 13, 2012, etc. Regarding the case where a seller in a contract title trust is bona fide, Supreme Court Decision 98Do4347 Decided March 24, 200, etc.