1. The Defendants are indicated in [Attachment] (1), (2), (3), (4), and (1), respectively, on the part of the Plaintiff, among the 1,481 square meters of the Seojin-gu Seoul Metropolitan City D.

1. On April 20, 1992, the registration of ownership transfer was completed on April 22, 1982 on the part of the Plaintiff on December 22, 1982 on the part of the Plaintiff, including the current status of the registration of real estate and the residence of E, etc., and on the above land, the building as described in paragraph (1) of the order owned by the Plaintiff (hereinafter “instant building”).

E was living in the instant building without compensation and died on November 17, 2017, and Defendant C, the wife of E, resides in the said building.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1-5-5 of evidence 7 through 9-5 of evidence 2, Eul's entry or video, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. As to the plaintiff's lawsuit of this case, the plaintiff sought delivery to the defendants who possess the building of this case, the defendants asserted that since the plaintiff called Gap's house as the plaintiff's manager to go through the manager, the plaintiff demanded the director's expenses, and the plaintiff continued to live close to and continue to pay the director's expenses through the manager.

On the other hand, there is no evidence to prove the facts as alleged by the Defendant, and in full view of all the evidence submitted by the original and the Defendant, it is insufficient to view that the Defendants had the title to occupy the building of this case.

3. According to the conclusion, we decide to accept all the Plaintiff’s claims against the Defendants. It is so decided as per Disposition.