토지인도 등
1. Defendant B:
(a) collect trees planted on each land listed in the separate sheet, and as above.
1. In fact, if the purport of the entire pleadings is added to the statements in Evidence Nos. 1 through 5, 4, and 5-1 to 8, and 6 of Evidence Nos. 1-1, the Plaintiff and the landscaped enterprise, around 2008, Defendant B, who operated the Plaintiff and the landscaped enterprise, entered into a lease agreement with the purpose of planting trees on each of the instant lands on the premise that they will restore each of the instant lands to their original state upon the termination of the lease agreement (hereinafter referred to as “instant lease agreement”). Defendant B, from the above point of time, occupied and used each of the instant lands on the land in the separate sheet owned by the Plaintiff (hereinafter referred to as “each of the instant lands”). From February 28, 2008 to the end of February 28, 2013.
2. Determination as to the plaintiff's claim against the defendant B
A. According to the facts found in the above determination as to the ground for the claim, the lease contract of this case was terminated on February 28, 2013. Thus, Defendant B is obligated to collect trees that are planted on each of the land of this case and deliver each of the land of this case to the Plaintiff, barring any special circumstance. (2) Defendant B’s assertion and determination as to the exercise of the claim for the purchase of each of the land of this case was made by the parties, and Defendant B did not have a duty to collect the above trees and deliver each of the land of this case to the Plaintiff. Accordingly, the Plaintiff agreed to restore the land of this case upon the termination of the lease contract of this case to the original state, which constitutes the waiver of the claim for the purchase of land of this case, and the waiver of the claim for the purchase of each of the land of this case cannot be deemed disadvantageous to Defendant B.