1. The defendant is against the plaintiffs:

(a) order the real estate listed in the separate sheet;

B. From May 18, 2018, the above-mentioned A

(b).

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The apartment in the attached list (hereinafter “the apartment in this case”) was owned by the network D (hereinafter “the deceased”). As the deceased died on April 6, 2018, the Plaintiffs and Nonparty E, who were their inheritors, inherited the ownership of the apartment in this case.

B. The Defendant, from August 23, 2005, moved his resident registration to the apartment of this case from around August 23, 2005, started living with the deceased, and used the apartment of this case without any consideration until the deceased died.

C. The defendant is residing in the apartment of this case until now.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap 1 to 3 evidence, Gap 1 to 1 evidence, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination as to the cause of action

A. According to the above facts, the defendant, as co-owners of the apartment of this case, is obligated to order the plaintiffs who seek exclusion from disturbance as a preservation act for the jointly owned property, unless there are special circumstances.

B. The following facts are acknowledged based on the following facts: (i) A’s statement in the above facts of recognition and the overall purport of the arguments as to the evidence Nos. 1, 2, 3, and 5’s statement in the above facts; (ii) the Plaintiffs sent to the Defendant, around April 19, 2018 after the funeral procedure for the Deceased, a document evidencing that “if the Plaintiffs requested the Defendant to surrender the apartment of this case and do not perform it, they would take a legal procedure to seek return of unjust enrichment equivalent to the rent acquired from the use and profit of the apartment of this case; and (ii) the Defendant refused to return the name of the apartment of this case despite the delivery of the above content-certified mail; and (iii) the Plaintiffs filed the instant lawsuit seeking return of the name of the apartment of this case and unjust enrichment against the Defendant, including the fact that the copy of the complaint of this case was served on the Defendant around May 17, 2018.