1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the defendant is modified as follows.

The defendant is co-defendant of the first instance court.

1. The reasoning of the judgment of this court citing the judgment of the court of first instance is as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for the following cases, and thus, it is acceptable in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. The 6th and fourth parts of the judgment of the court of first instance are as follows. "At present, the Defendants occupy and use each of the above parts."

From September 27, 2016, the Defendant occupied and used the instant store from around September 27, 2016. The following is added to the second instance judgment of the first instance.

The defendant ordered the non-party company on September 27, 2017 of this case's store, and thereafter asserted that the non-party company did not possess or use the store of this case. Accordingly, according to the statement of No. 7, the defendant paid rent to the non-party company by April 2018. Since the above temporary border seems to have occupied or used the store of this case, the statement of No. 6, No. 8, and No. 10 (including the provisional number) is contrary thereto, but it is believed that the plaintiff was delivered the store of this case to the first police officer on June 2018, the defendant's above argument is reasonable, since the plaintiff was the person who was delivered the store of this case to the non-party company on June 27, 2018, and therefore, the defendant's statement of No. 11 of the judgment of the court of first instance was made by cutting down the following from No. 6 to No.

On May 31, 2018, the Plaintiff: (a) was the person to whom the instant store was delivered at the beginning of June 2018 on the date for the second pleading in the trial of the first instance; (b) in calculating the amount of unjust enrichment, the amount of unjust enrichment up to May 31, 2018 shall be calculated favorably to the Defendant’s side until May 31, 2018. The amount of unjust enrichment up to the period shall be KRW 3,927,00 (i.e., the aforementioned KRW 981,750 x 4 months x 981,750 x 16 months from February 1, 2017 to May 31, 2018; and (c) the amount of unjust enrichment up to the period from February 1, 2017 to May 31, 200 x 15,708,750 x 16 months from the date of the second pleading in the trial of the first instance is clear calculation.