2. The costs of appeal are assessed against the Defendants.

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

(See the evidence duly admitted and examined by the court of first instance, the court of first instance is justified in finding the facts of the court of first instance and its determination, even if the evidence additionally submitted by the court of first instance. The court of first instance 5 to 18 were followed as follows.

According to the statement in Eul evidence No. 4, although it is not sufficient to recognize that the husband of defendant Eul remitted 20 million won to F representative director F, it is not sufficient to recognize that the money was used as expenses for replacing fire pumps. For the above reasons, since the defendant Eul cannot have any opposing power under the Commercial Building Lease Protection Act to the plaintiff, the new owner cannot make a claim for reimbursement of necessary and beneficial expenses. In addition, it is insufficient to recognize that the defendants paid expenses to preserve or improve the building of this case only with the statement in the evidence Nos. 8 through 23, and there is no other evidence to recognize otherwise. Further, the defendant Eul has an opposing power under the Commercial Building Lease Protection Act as to the part No. 2 in the judgment of the court of first instance among the building of this case which was entered into with D on February 28, 2014, and there is no other evidence to recognize that the contract has been terminated as to the above part No. 150. 64 square meters.

(2) The Defendants may not claim against D any other necessary expenses, beneficial expenses, etc. for any reason, such as the cost of installing and removing various structures and appurtenant facilities, etc., which they have spent during the period of using the building.

③ The Defendants specified in the foregoing paragraph (1).