1. The defendant

(a) deliver real estate listed in the Schedule of Attached Goods;

(b) 27,942,000 won and its corresponding;

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On July 27, 2010, the Plaintiff, as the implementer of a zone B-B housing construction project, completed the registration of transfer of ownership on the land indicated in the [Attachment] List of Articles (1) incorporated in the said project district (hereinafter “instant land”) on July 23, 2010 for the acquisition of land for public use by consultation.

B. The Defendant occupied the instant land by using the buildings indicated in the list of the attached articles (2) on the ground of the instant land (hereinafter “instant building”) as the former owner of the instant land.

C. The Plaintiff filed an application for adjudication of expropriation because it had consulted with the Defendant on the compensation for the instant building, but did not reach an agreement. On June 22, 2012, the Central Land Expropriation Committee deposited the compensation under the said adjudication of expropriation to the Defendant on August 13, 2012.

As of January 1, 2010, the individual officially announced value of the instant land is KRW 1,790,000 per square meter.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence Nos. 1-5, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination on the cause of the claim

A. According to the above facts, the Plaintiff was the owner of the instant land and the implementer of the Bogeumjari Housing District Development Project, and was fully paid compensation for losses to the Defendant according to the judgment of the Central Land Expropriation Committee.

Therefore, the defendant is obligated to deliver the building of this case and the land of this case to the plaintiff according to the provisions of Article 43 of the Act on Acquisition of and Compensation for Land, etc. for Public Works Projects, unless there are special circumstances.

B. In addition, the Defendant, while occupying and using the instant land, obtained the benefits of use without any legal ground, and thereby inflicted damages equivalent to the same amount on the Plaintiff.

Therefore, the plaintiff is obligated to return this as unjust enrichment to the plaintiff.

Furthermore, with respect to the amount of unjust enrichment to be returned by the defendant, it is the possession and use of real estate in ordinary cases.