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

3...

A. The defendant's assertion does not occupy the building indicated in the attached list (hereinafter "the building of this case"), and since C (hereinafter "the Foundation of this case") occupies and uses the building of this case, the lawsuit of the claim of this case filed against the defendant who does not occupy the building of this case is unlawful as a lawsuit filed against the non-party standing.

B. In a lawsuit for performance of judgment, a person who asserts that he/she has the right to standing to sue, and the person who has asserted as the person responsible for performance has the standing to sue.

(See Supreme Court Decision 94Da14797 delivered on June 14, 1994. A lawsuit for delivery of a building is a lawsuit against the possessor of the building, and as long as the plaintiff asserts that the defendant occupied the building of this case in the cause of the claim, the defendant has the standing to be the defendant.

Therefore, the defendant's defense of the above principal safety is without merit.

2. Determination as to the cause of action

A. The facts of recognition 1) D established E on April 26, 201 and purchased the instant building on May 9, 2001 with the view of new provincial cities, and completed the registration of ownership transfer in the name of D on May 10, 2001, and later, as of April 26, 201, the registration of ownership transfer in the name of the Plaintiff was completed as of April 26, 201 with respect to the instant building as of April 26, 201.

3 D filed a lawsuit against the Plaintiff as Seoul Central District Court 2013da85453 against the Seoul Central District Court seeking cancellation of ownership transfer registration of the instant building, and completed the actual business registration after which D and the Plaintiff started the establishment of the instant building and completed its business registration on March 28, 2013.