The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Expenses for appeal shall be borne by the defendant.

The purport of the claim and the purport of the appeal.

1. The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance citing the reasoning of the judgment is as follows, except for the addition of the following “2. additional determination” as to the assertion emphasized or added by the defendant in the court of first instance, and therefore, it is acceptable in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. Additional determination

A. The Defendant asserts that since the Plaintiff received KRW 500,000 per month from D the monthly payment of the rent for the instant building, the claim for return of unjust enrichment corresponding to one’s own share of the instant land constitutes double claim.

However, the evidence evidence Nos. 1, 2, and 3 alone is insufficient to acknowledge the fact that the Plaintiff received part of the rent of the instant building from D as alleged by the Defendant, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it.

The defendant's above assertion is without merit.

B. In addition, the defendant asserts that the lawsuit of this case is contrary to the good faith principle or abuse of power, except for D and E which manages lease revenue and other co-owners, and only to the defendant.

However, claiming the full performance against one of the obligors who have an indivisible obligation to return unjust profits with respect to the instant land cannot be deemed as going against the good faith principle or an abuse of right.

It is difficult for the defendant to accept the above argument.

3. In conclusion, the first instance judgment is just and the defendant's appeal is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition.