1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

1. The reasoning for the court’s explanation of the instant case is as follows, and the Plaintiff’s determination of the assertion emphasized or added in the trial is identical to the ground for the first instance judgment except for the following additional statement as to the reasoning for the first instance judgment. As such, this is acceptable pursuant to the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

From 6th to 8th of the judgment of the first instance court, the second to 6th of the judgment are as follows.

【A. The Plaintiff shall be the Daejeon Sung-gu B Large 260 square meters (hereinafter referred to as “one parcel of land”).

(C) 1,211 square meters (hereinafter “2 land”) for parking lots C.

F is the owner of the land, and F is the person who has leased two land from the Plaintiff. The second part of the first instance judgment of the first instance court “1 land” is the person who has leased two land from the Plaintiff.

Part 2, No. 12 and 13 of the judgment of the court of first instance are “each of the instant lands without the permission of the competent authorities” as “the land of this case without the permission of the competent authorities” in violation of the provisions of Article 12 of the Act on Special Measures for Designation and Management of Development Restriction Zones (hereinafter “Development Restriction Zones Act”) and four lots adjoining to the land such as Daejeon P, E, etc. (hereinafter “each of the instant lands”).

On August 7, 2012, 2012, "No. 8, 2012" in Part 20 of the Decision of the court of first instance shall be sentenced to August 7, 2012.

On November 27, 2012, the Daejeon District Court rendered a decision that the effect of each of the dispositions of this case shall be suspended until the judgment of the court of first instance is rendered, while the plaintiff et al. filed a lawsuit related to "the plaintiff et al. from "the plaintiff et al. of this case to 13 of the same page", and at the same time filed a petition against the defendant for suspending the validity of each of the dispositions of this case as the Daejeon District Court 2012A355.

(c)"No. 14 of the first instance court's judgment "No. 24, 2013." means "No. 24, 2013." on July 24, 2013. The third part of the third part of the first instance court's judgment "a warrant of vicarious execution shall be issued with the following content: