1. Each appeal by the Defendants is dismissed.

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

3. Text of the judgment of the court of first instance;

1. Facts of premise;

A. (i) AX building (hereinafter referred to as “instant building”) is a dynamic building constructed in Dongdaemun-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government Y (750 buildings consisting of 60 apartment houses and 60 apartment houses) and a main complex building constructed on the ground of the Z (648 apartment houses and 28 apartment houses).

The plaintiffs are sectional owners of some of the four-story stores of the above building title 4, and the ownership status of the plaintiffs (the whole store owned by the plaintiffs "the plaintiffs") and the amount equivalent to the annual rent for each sectionally owned store in 2013 and 2014 are as stated in the separate sheet ownership status and the corresponding column of rent.

B. (i) The Defendants, from October 29, 2004, jointly occupied the 4th floor of the above 4th floor as the method of leasing the entire 4th floor of the building of this case from Defendant A to an organization whose management body referred to the entire 4th floor of the building of this case. From February 1, 2006, the Defendant owned the entire 4th floor of the above 4th floor by way of leasing 1/2 each of the above 4th floor.

The sectional owners, including the plaintiffs, filed an application with the court for the suspension of construction and the suspension of delivery of the plaintiffs' stores (including Nos. 49 and Q20, 820, respectively) by the Defendants, who occupied the entire four floors without permission, and filed an application for the suspension of construction and the suspension of delivery of the plaintiffs' stores (including the Appointed L store and Q20,00).

Article 22(1) of the Civil Procedure Act provides that the Defendants shall file an application for provisional injunction to the effect that the Defendants shall jointly possess the stores subject to the application and carry out the construction of the above dance hall on January 21, 2014, but the execution was not properly carried out.

B. As to the instant provisional disposition case, the Defendants filed a separate lawsuit against the Defendants regarding the instant provisional disposition case, the Plaintiffs filed a lawsuit against the Defendants for removal and request for extradition against the Plaintiffs’ stores’ above-ground facilities and the above store under the court 2014Da1086666.

Shebly the Defendants, even in the lawsuit on the merits of this case, shall be accompanied by the building of this case from October 29, 2004.