The defendant shall receive KRW 100,000,000 from the plaintiff and at the same time real estate stated in the attached Table from the plaintiff.

1. The Plaintiff’s judgment on the cause of the claim is the owner of the instant real estate, and the fact that the Defendant occupied the instant real estate is not a dispute between the parties.

Thus, the defendant has a duty to deliver the real estate of this case to the plaintiff who is the owner, unless there are special circumstances.

2. Judgment on the defendant's assertion

A. On the summary of the Defendant’s assertion, the Defendant asserted that the Defendant had a duty to deliver the instant real estate only by paying the deposit deposit amounting to KRW 100 million, since the Defendant leased the instant real estate from the Plaintiff lawfully.

B. (1) Therefore, comprehensively taking account of the overall purport of the arguments in the testimony of the public health unit, Gap evidence No. 6, Eul evidence No. 1-2, and Eul witness testimony, the plaintiff married on May 29, 2014 with the non-party D who was his/her spouse, and the plaintiff entrusted D with the authority to purchase the land of this case and to newly build and sell the land on the land of this case, which is the site of this case,

Therefore, the defendant is recognized to have lawfully concluded a lease contract with the plaintiff.

(3) As to this, the Plaintiff, instead of a licensed real estate agent C, calls with a third party who belongs D's broker as the Plaintiff.