건물명도
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
The summary of the case is the case that the plaintiff claims that the lessee of the D Station transfer parking lot 514 is the defendant and claims the payment of overdue management expenses against the defendant.
In fact, the Plaintiff acquired on July 21, 2004 and leased and managed a business right to the whole five floors above the ground among the business rights (including the act of lease on a deposit basis) concerning D Station Transfer Parking Lots located in Seocho-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, which the same-sex Construction Co., Ltd. was in accordance with the permission for free use of public property in Seoul Metropolitan City Mayor on February 26, 1996.
On February 24, 2010, the Plaintiff borrowed KRW 100 million from F, the representative of the Defendant, and prepared a business license transfer contract with the Plaintiff, transferee F, and transfer amount of KRW 100 million with respect to the entire five-story of the transfer parking lot on the ground of the above D station, and the Plaintiff transferred the above business license from May 24, 2010 to F from May 24, 2010 if the Plaintiff is unable to pay the borrowed money by May 12, 2010.
On May 2, 2011, F drafted again a letter of right to use the content that the right of the Plaintiff to use 514 out of the five floors above the D Station transfer parking lot was sold in the amount of KRW 100 million and the payment of management expenses.
【Ground of recognition” without any dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 12, 17, and 18-1, 2, 3, 19-2, 19, Eul evidence Nos. 19, Eul evidence Nos. 1, 2, and 3, and the purport of the entire pleadings, despite the plaintiff's assertion of the main purpose of the safety defense as a whole with F in spite of the contract with F, the plaintiff filed the lawsuit against the defendant who was designated by mistake of the party and is represented by F, which lacks the litigation requirements.
Judgment
In a lawsuit for performance, a person who asserts himself/herself as a person entitled to claim performance has standing to sue and is asserted as a person obligated to perform performance, and thus has standing to be the defendant, and the plaintiff's assertion itself is standing to sue, and the plaintiff and the defendant do not need to be the person obligated to perform
(See Supreme Court Decision 94Da14797 delivered on June 14, 1994, etc.).