1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Basic facts

A. On March 26, 2010, the Plaintiff entered into a lease agreement with C to lease Nos. 405 and 406 (hereinafter “instant commercial building”) of the fourth floor of the Dayang-gu Seoul Metropolitan City D Building (hereinafter “instant commercial building”). From April 2010, the Plaintiff operated the instant commercial building with the trade name “E” as “E”.

B. The Defendant is a lessee as set forth in subparagraphs 403 and 404 adjacent to the instant commercial building, and operates the F from May 2009 to the trade name “F.”

C. From May 2009 to October 2013, the Defendant attached a corridor (the part that can freely pass through the instant commercial building) between the instant commercial building and the instant 403 and 404 and a corridor’s wall (hereinafter “the instant wall”) among the walls that are the boundary of the instant commercial building, the Defendant attached a picture of 120cm wide and 60cm long to the wall of the instant commercial building (hereinafter “the instant forest”).

Article 2 (5) and (6) of the Regulations on Management Body of the D Building stipulate that section for exclusive use is a wall, partitions, pole, pole, exhauster, ceiling, and floor of a building which is the object of sectional ownership, and section for common use is a building other than section for exclusive use and a building site and accessories that do not belong to section for exclusive use.

[Grounds: Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 19, 20 evidence, Eul evidence 2, the result of on-site inspection by this court, the purport of whole pleadings]

2. The plaintiff's assertion

A. The instant wall that is premised on the premise falls under the section of exclusive ownership that belongs to the instant commercial building leased by the Plaintiff. The Defendant was unable to construct a test on the instant wall by illegally occupying the leased section of exclusive ownership by means of attaching the instant picture and advertising to the instant wall from before the Plaintiff leased the instant commercial building to October 12, 2013.

B. The Plaintiff asserted the claim for damages due to the delay in construction works against the Defendant on April 7, 2010, the instant forest and the Defendant objection.