1. All appeals by the defendant against the plaintiffs are dismissed.

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

purport, purport, and.

1. The reasoning of the court's explanation concerning this case is as follows, except for the dismissal of the first instance court's judgment or addition of the defendant's additional assertion, and therefore, it is identical to the reasoning of the first instance court's judgment. Thus, it is citing this as it is in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. On the second page of the judgment of the first instance court, the second page “instant land” of the fourth instance court’s ruling, which read “each land specified in attached Tables 1 and 2,” and read “Article 336 of the Civil Act” as “Article 366 of the Civil Act” of the fourth instance court’s ruling of the first instance court’s first instance court’s second page “No. 19, May 29, 2017”, which read “No. 4 of the first instance court’s fourth instance judgment “the date of commencement of compulsory auction or the date of commencement of compulsory auction” as “Article 366 of the Civil Act.”

3. The Defendant asserts to the effect that, prior to the commencement of compulsory auction of this case, the right to use the land of this case was established as a site for the building of this case, and pursuant to Article 20 of the Act on Ownership and Management of Condominium Buildings (hereinafter “Aggregate Buildings Act”), the right to use the land of this case cannot be disposed of separately from the section of exclusive ownership. Thus, the compulsory auction procedure of this case concerning the land of this case is null and void, and the Plaintiffs did not acquire the ownership of the land of this case.

Under the same law, which is prohibited from a separate disposition pursuant to Article 20 of the Aggregate Buildings Act, the right to use a site is a right that a sectional owner has against the site of a building in order to own a section for exclusive use (see Article 2 subparagraph 6 of the Aggregate Buildings Act). Thus, the right that a person who is not a sectional owner has against the land which became a site of a aggregate building regardless of the ownership of a section for exclusive use before the construction of the aggregate building

Supreme Court Decision 2011Da12149, 12156 Decided October 24, 2013