1. The defendant shall deliver to the plaintiff the real estate stated in the attached list.

2. The costs of the lawsuit are assessed against the defendant.

3...

1. The Plaintiff, as to the cause of the claim, purchased the real estate (hereinafter “instant apartment”) listed in the separate sheet in the procedure for compulsory auction by this court C (hereinafter “instant auction procedure”) and paid the purchase price on January 7, 2014. The Defendant, as of the date of closing argument in the instant case, has no dispute between the parties, or can be recognized by comprehensively considering the purport of the entries in the evidence Nos. 1 and 2 and the whole pleadings. Accordingly, according to the above facts of recognition, the Defendant is obligated to deliver the said apartment to the Plaintiff, the owner of the instant apartment.

2. Judgment on the defendant's assertion

A. The Defendant’s gist of the Defendant’s assertion: (a) entered into a contract for interior interior interior interior interior interior interior interior interior interior interior interior interior interior interior of the building with E, the owner of the instant apartment; and (b) completed the said construction on August 31, 2012; (c) however, E did not pay the remainder of the construction cost; (d) the Defendant started occupying the instant apartment in order to receive payment of KRW 99,00,000 from August 20, 2013 to receive the remainder of the construction cost; and thereafter, (e) thereafter, the Defendant is unable to comply with the Plaintiff’s claim.

B. A person who acquired a civil lien subsequent to the registration of the decision on commencing auction on any real estate, cannot claim his/her lien against the purchaser of the auction procedure.

(See Supreme Court Decision 2010Da84932 Decided April 10, 2014, and Supreme Court Decision 2005Da22688 Decided August 19, 2005, etc.). The decision to commence the auction procedure of this case was made on September 3, 2012, the decision to commence the auction procedure of this case was made on February 12, 2013, and on the same day, the fact that the registration of the decision to commence the auction procedure of this case was completed on the apartment of this case, was made on February 12, 2013, and the fact that the registration of the decision to commence the auction procedure of this case was completed on the same day is either disputed between the parties or can be recognized by comprehensively taking into account the overall purport of the entry in the evidence No.