1. The Defendant is in the name of the owner of each building listed in the separate sheet to the Plaintiffs.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiffs and the Defendant: (a) seven parcels, E, F,G, H, I, and J, including the factory site of 1,854 square meters in Seongbuk-gun, Seongbuk-gun;

K. The sum of the above eight parcels (hereinafter referred to as “instant land”).

(B) Each 1/3 share is owned by the Defendant. On May 18, 2016, each of the buildings listed in the separate sheet on the ground of the instant land (hereinafter “instant building”).

As to the building permit granted to the owner of Seongdong-gun-gun-si, the Defendant alone (hereinafter “instant building permit”).

Upon receipt of a contract, the construction was commenced on May 25, 2016 and approved for use on May 8, 2017. At present, the owner of the building in the building management ledger of this case is registered in the name of the defendant alone. [The fact that there is no dispute over the grounds for recognition, entry in the evidence Nos. 1 and 3, and the purport of the whole pleadings.]

2. We examine the judgment. The plaintiffs and the defendant agreed to jointly construct each of the buildings of this case and jointly acquire ownership by jointly constructing each of the buildings of this case, and jointly register the owner's name; the conclusion of the construction contract and the construction permission, etc. of each of the buildings of this case are handled by the defendant; however, the fact that each of the buildings of this case was permitted by the defendant's sole name is

Therefore, the plaintiff has the right to seek implementation of the procedure for change of name against the defendant who is refusing to implement the procedure for change of name of the owner for the building permit of this case as the owner in the building register of this case.

Therefore, the defendant is obligated to implement the procedure for changing the name of the owner under the building permit of this case from the defendant to the joint name of the defendant and the plaintiffs.

3. In conclusion, the plaintiffs' claim of this case is reasonable, and it is so decided as per Disposition.