1. The Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) shall deliver to the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) a commercial building listed in the separate sheet.

2. The case.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On October 2016, the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant; hereinafter “Plaintiff”) subcontracted the construction of metal structure windows from the F Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “F”) contracted for the construction of the original building C on the ground (title D; neighborhood living facilities, accommodation facilities, etc. on the second and seventh floors underground) (hereinafter “instant building”) (hereinafter “instant building”) and completed around September 30, 2017.

B. The instant building obtained approval for use on December 8, 2017, and the registration for the preservation of ownership was completed on December 14, 2017. The Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff; hereinafter “Defendant”) and G acquired the shares of 1/2 of the instant building by public sale on October 25, 2018, and completed the registration for the transfer of ownership on November 28, 2018.

C. The Plaintiff filed a lawsuit claiming F to F for the payment of the unpaid construction cost of KRW 788,973,500 and damages for delay (Skcheon District Court Decision 2018Gahap226). The Plaintiff was awarded a favorable judgment on August 16, 2018, and the said judgment became final and conclusive.

On the other hand, around May 2018, the Plaintiff occupied the instant commercial building, such as installing a guard system and locks, installing an electronic key, etc. in the guard system, and installing a banner called “in the course of exercising the right of retention” around August of the same year. However, on November 18, 2018, after the Defendant acquired ownership, the Plaintiff deprived the Plaintiff of the Plaintiff’s possession by forcing the locks of the instant commercial building to leave the locks and leaving the guard system.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 5 evidence, Eul evidence 1 to 5, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The Plaintiff’s judgment on the claim for main lawsuit is to seek the restoration of possession against the Defendant regarding the instant commercial building, inasmuch as he/she sought the restoration of possession against the Defendant from the Defendant. Therefore, the Plaintiff is exempted from examining only whether he/she occupied the said commercial building at the time when he/she asserts that he/she was deprived of possession.