1. The defendant shall deliver to the plaintiff the real estate stated in the attached list.

2. The costs of the lawsuit are assessed against the defendant.

3...

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On October 4, 2005, the Defendant purchased the real estate listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant building”) and filed a move-in report on December 6, 2005, and continued to reside from that time on and after the move-in report was filed on the same loan. The Plaintiff had been residing in the said building with the Defendant for five to six years.

B. The original building purchased around October 4, 2005 and completed the registration of ownership transfer in its name.

Then, on October 12, 2015, the Plaintiff purchased the instant building from the Defendant and completed the registration of ownership transfer in the name of the Plaintiff, and filed a move-in report on the instant building on January 4, 2016.

C. On October 19, 2018, the Defendant filed a lawsuit against the Plaintiff to claim consolation money, etc. following the de facto marital relationship’s resolution, and the said lawsuit is pending.

(Reasons for recognition), entry in Gap 1, 3, Eul 2 and 3 (including additional numbers), and the purport of the whole pleadings, without dispute (based on recognition)

2. According to Article 830(1) of the Civil Act, the real estate acquired in the sole name of a married couple during the marriage shall be presumed to be the special property of the nominal owner. In order to reverse the presumption of special property as above, the other spouse shall bear the price for the real estate in question and prove that the real estate was acquired in order to own the real estate substantially.

(See Supreme Court Decision 2013Da49572 Decided October 31, 2013). In light of the foregoing legal doctrine, the Plaintiff is the owner of the instant building, and the fact that the Defendant occupied the instant building is recognized as above. There is no assertion as to the Defendant’s acquisition of the instant building by bearing the price for the instant building, and there is no proof of assertion as to the fact that the Defendant acquired the instant building to own it in substance. Therefore, the Defendant is obligated to deliver the instant building to the Plaintiff, barring special circumstances.

3. As to the Defendant’s assertion, the Defendant and the Plaintiff.