2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

(a) Main Complex Building C in Suwon-si D is a building with the five underground floors for the main complex building and the 19th floor above the ground level, and a building with the 19th floor above the ground level above the ground level;

(hereinafter referred to as “instant commercial building.” Although the instant commercial building was constructed as an aggregate building and was installed with partitions, floor boundary marks, partitions, walls, building number signs, etc. according to the sectional ownership of buyers, the shops under the respective sectional ownership cannot be divided by structure after all such facilities were removed in around 2002.

B. On August 24, 2001, the Plaintiff completed the registration of ownership transfer on the underground floor Nos. 1-1, 1-2, 15, 16, 17, 78, 79, and 41 of the above commercial building.

(hereinafter the above five-story stores are collectively referred to as the "five-story Store" and the above underground floors stores are referred to as the "the ground for recognition"). 【No dispute exists, Gap 1, 6, 7, Eul 1-3 through 5, Eul 1-3 through 6-1, 2, and the purport of the whole pleadings.

2. The Plaintiff became a co-owner who owns shares due to the extinguishment of structural division of the commercial building in this case’s assertion.

The Defendant, without any legal ground, without permission from December 7, 2013 to December 10, 2015, operated the instant five-story shop and operated the restaurant at the instant underground stores from December 7, 2013 to December 10, 2015. As such, the Defendant, as the owner of equity interest in each of the instant stores, should return to the Plaintiff, who is the owner of equity interest in each of the said five-story stores, unjust enrichment equivalent to the rent for each of the said periods.

3. Determination

A. Since December 7, 2013, the Defendant was insufficient to recognize the possession of the instant underground store since the expiration of the lease term stipulated in the instant contract only by the 2 (lease Agreement) evidence No. 2 (a lease agreement) of the part on the claim for the instant underground store, and there is no other evidence to prove otherwise.

Therefore, this part of the argument that is based on this is rejected.

B. The claim part concerning the five-story stores of this case falls under part of one building registered as a sectioned building.