건물명도
1. The part of the judgment of the first instance against the Defendants shall be revoked.
2. The plaintiff falling under the above part of the revocation.
1. The reasoning for this part of this Court’s reasoning is as follows, and it is identical to the entry of “1. Fact finding” in the judgment of the court of first instance, except for partial dismissal as follows. Thus, it is acceptable in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure
(Provided, That on August 13, 2019, the Defendant’s Intervenor withdrawn from the appeal filed an appeal for the Intervenor C, but C withdrawn the appeal filed by the Defendant’s Intervenor on August 13, 2019. The part concerning the Defendant’s joint Defendant C in the first instance trial, excluding the part concerning the Defendant in the first instance trial) - the part concerning the height of the appeal - Paragraph 4 of the “refinite concrete structure” as “refinite concrete structure.”
- 5 pages 2 of the judgment of the court of first instance, "the registration of ownership transfer" is advanced as "the registration of ownership transfer".
- Of the six pages, Q No. 8 shall be changed to “L”.
- Of 6 pages 9 to 10, the approximate location
3. The drawing (1) is deleted and “the place indicated as “specialized restaurant”. - - 6 pages 1 and 6, the Defendant’s assistant participant, as “the Defendant’s assistant participant”, are deemed to be the Defendant’s Intervenor. - The Defendant’s assistant participant at 8 pages 3 and 6, respectively, are deemed to be the Defendant’s Intervenor’s Intervenor’s Intervenor. - the “U” at 9 pages 3-4 and 9 are deemed to be the “T”. - On 12 pages 2-4 and 12, “Y store was the place where T was operated with a lease from the Nonparty Company, but Defendant B leased from the Nonparty Company in 198 and operated Y.
However, the phrase is deleted.
2. The Plaintiff’s assertion is an owner of the share of 152.87/273.77 of the internal underground floors.
Therefore, the defendants who possess part of the internal underground floors must deliver the part of possession to the plaintiff, and return unjust enrichment equivalent to the rent due to the possession or compensate for damages.
3. Determination
A. As the judgment on the claim against Defendant B is asserted that Defendant B was located not in the Y store’s underground floor but in the Defendant’s Intervenor’s Intervenor’s and his spouse’s underground floor L, the Y store first fell under the underground floor.