청구이의
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
1. Facts of recognition;
A. The Plaintiff and the Defendant filed a lawsuit against the Plaintiff to the effect that “the right to sunshine, view, etc. of the Defendant is infringed upon due to the Plaintiff’s building owned or the Defendant’s right of possession is infringed.” On July 9, 2013, the said court rendered a lawsuit against the Plaintiff on the ground that the Defendant may exercise the Plaintiff’s right to claim the exclusion of disturbance based on the right of possession against the Plaintiff on the ground that “the Defendant (the title of the Plaintiff in this case is the Plaintiff in this case),” “The Defendant (the title of the Plaintiff in this case, refers to the Defendant in this case), shall remove 2 square meters of the steel frame board board of 2 square meters on the ground of 3,4,12,100 square meters on the land of 10 square meters in Chungcheongnam-do, Ulsan-gun, Seoul Special Metropolitan City, and deliver the said land to the Plaintiff, and remove part of the land in this case’s 200 square meters in order of the attached Table No. 4, 3,4,12,110 and 2.
(2) The Defendant appealed as the Daegu District Court No. 2013Na13854 regarding the part against which the said judgment was lost, but the said appellate court rendered a judgment dismissing the Defendant’s appeal on December 19, 2013, and the said judgment became final and conclusive around that time.
3) On August 28, 2013, the Defendant filed an application for substitute enforcement with the Daegu District Court Youngdong Branch E on the instant judgment. (b) On September 1, 2011, the Defendant: (a) from the Korea Asset Management Corporation on September 1, 201, the Defendant leased the loan of 4m2 and 2m2m2 (hereinafter “each of the instant lands”) for the lease period from September 1, 201 to August 31, 2016.
(hereinafter. (2) On September 6, 2013, the Korea Asset Management Corporation notified the Defendant of the termination of the instant loan agreement. (3) Notwithstanding the termination of the instant loan agreement, the Defendant is the instant case.