1.The judgment of the first instance shall be modified as follows:

The Defendant-Counterclaim Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) is KRW 19,188,000.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On March 31, 2014, the Plaintiff is an owner who completed the registration of ownership transfer with respect to real estate listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant housing”).

B. On May 10, 2009, the Defendant entered into a lease agreement with F, who was the owner of the instant housing (a deposit of KRW 50 million, KRW 100,000 per month, and the period from May 30, 2009) and completed a move-in report on June 1, 2009 and transferred the instant housing to the Plaintiff on September 22, 2015 while the Defendant resided in the instant housing.

C. The instant housing was newly built and owned by the originalF. However, G completed the registration of provisional disposition that was prohibited from disposing of the instant housing on May 20, 2009, which was before the Defendant completed the said move-in report, with F as the debtor. On November 16, 2009, the registration of ownership transfer was completed on the ground of sale, while the registration of ownership transfer was completed on December 2, 2009 due to cancellation.

G completed the registration of the right to claim ownership transfer in the name of D on August 13, 2010 with respect to the instant house, and the Plaintiff transferred the right to claim ownership transfer from D on April 5, 2013, and completed the registration of ownership transfer in its name on March 31, 2014.

E. The assessment of rent on or around March 2014 for the instant housing is KRW 1,80,000 per month.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence No. 1, Eul evidence No. 1, each entry of Eul evidence No. 1, the result of a request for a judgment of the court of first instance for a judgment, the purport of whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. The Plaintiff asserted 1) The Plaintiff sought payment of the amount of damages equivalent to the delivery and rent of the instant house against the Defendant, who is the owner of the instant house without a lawful title, who is in possession of the said owner without a legitimate title. 2) The Defendant entered into a lease agreement with F, the owner of the instant house, and succeeded to the lessor’s status by acquiring the ownership of the instant house. D, who was represented by the Plaintiff, purchased the instant house from G, and between D, G, and the Defendant’s agent I.