1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

1. Basic facts

A. C completed the registration of ownership transfer based on sale and purchase as of January 10, 1986 with respect to the instant housing on January 16, 1986. Upon the death of C, the Plaintiff, his wife, completed the registration of ownership transfer based on the inheritance as of April 10, 2006 by agreement and division as of January 31, 2006, and completed the registration of ownership transfer based on the sale and purchase as of April 10, 2006, Inc. (hereinafter “Nonindicted Company”).

B. The Seoul Northern District Court rendered a voluntary decision to commence the auction on November 18, 2009 upon the application of D, a mortgagee who completed September 19, 2008 the registration of establishment of a neighboring mortgage on the instant housing, and the Defendant completed the registration of ownership transfer on June 24, 201 by winning the instant housing at the above auction procedure.

C. Meanwhile, on October 17, 1987, the Plaintiff first filed a move-in report to the instant house. On November 5, 2008, the Plaintiff was ex officio due to the unauthorized Transfer, and was re-registered on February 17, 2009, and thereafter, on October 21, 201, the Plaintiff was re-registered as the unknown domicile on October 21, 201, following procedures for investigating the facts of the public official’s unknown domicile who acquired the instant house following the Defendant’s report of unknown domicile

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 2, 3, 6, 9, 10, 12, and 13, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Judgment on the main claim

A. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion (i) sold the instant housing at KRW 250 million to the non-party company, and the Plaintiff would substitute the instant housing with the lease deposit. On April 3, 2006, the Plaintiff concluded a lease agreement with the non-party company as to the instant housing at KRW 50 million, and from April 10, 2006 to April 9, 2008, with the lease term fixed from April 10, 2006 to the renewal of the said lease agreement. The Plaintiff occupied the instant housing while the said lease was renewed, but the Defendant was deprived of the Plaintiff’s possession of the instant housing. Accordingly, upon the Plaintiff’s request for the recovery of possession, the instant housing was owned by the Plaintiff.