1. All appeals by the Defendants are dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

1.

1. The court's explanation of this case is the same as the part of the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for the following modifications or additions. Thus, it is acceptable to accept this as it is in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. A portion used for adding or cutting;

A. In addition, “G”’s place of business prior to the factory of Seosan-gu E, Busan-gu, Seoul-gu, the third party judgment of the court of first instance shall add “G” to “the location of the place of business.”

B. Section 16, 17 of the third party decision of the court of first instance is H. On the other hand, the defendants shall be placed in a non-HS factory located in S. S., 259-3, S., S., S., S., S., S., S., S., S., S., S., S., S., S., S., S., S., S., S., S., S., S.,

(c) from 4th to 17th of the first instance judgment shall be followed as follows.

“B. The Defendants asserted that the instant machinery is kept indoors in order to avoid damage due to the precision equipment and the wind, etc., and there is no place to keep the instant machinery in the factory of the Defendant A, and that the instant machinery is kept in the Non-AS factory located in the SPP (BU) company located in SPP (BU) 259-3, an affiliated company, from the time the machinery was stored in the GPPPP, i.e., e., the instant lawsuit should be brought against the Defendants, not the Defendants. Even if the Defendants arbitrarily stored the instant machinery in SPPS, it is reasonable to view that the Defendants still possess the instant machinery as an indirect occupant. Accordingly, according to the aforementioned argument that the Defendants are not the occupants (On the other hand, according to the corporeal movables disposal protocol of Changwon District Court Decision 2014Ga5, Jan. 14, 2014, the execution place of the instant machinery is deemed to be the “when she was aware of the fact that she was 259-19-25,” as the entire pleadings.