1. Revocation of a judgment of the first instance;

2. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

3. All costs of the lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Basic Facts

The Plaintiff, an aggregate building, is the owner of the Dong-gu Seoul Special Metropolitan City C Commercial Building (hereinafter “instant commercial building”) No. 105 (hereinafter “105”), and the Defendant is the lessee of the commercial building No. 105 (hereinafter “102 commercial building”). At present, the Plaintiff is the lessee of the commercial building No. 102 (hereinafter “102 commercial building”).

On December 4, 2012, the Plaintiff leased 105 commercial buildings to the Defendant. However, the Defendant operated a cosmetic from around 105 to March 31, 2016 with the trade name “D”.

around 2013, the plaintiff and the defendant set up the "D Beauty" signboard such as the attached Form (hereinafter referred to as the "instant signboard") on the inner outer wall of the commercial building of this case.

Around March 2016, the Defendant transferred the aforementioned “D Beauty Room” to a commercial building of 102, and continues its business in a commercial building of 102 until the date of closing argument in the trial.

[Ground of recognition] The facts that there is no dispute, Gap's evidence Nos. 1 through 4, claims for the purport of the whole pleadings, and claims for restitution following the termination of the conclusion of the judgment lease agreement. The signboards of this case are established for the lessee of commercial buildings No. 105, and the defendant moved to a commercial building No. 102, so the signboards of this case must be removed due to the restoration to original state following the termination of the above lease agreement with the plaintiff.

Judgment

It is insufficient to recognize the fact that the signboard location of this case was set up by the owner or lessee of a commercial building No. 105, or when the above lease contract is terminated by the original owner or the defendant, the removal of the signboard of this case is made the content of the above lease contract. The plaintiff's claim for this part is without merit, since there is no other evidence to acknowledge it.

A summary of the cause of the claim for removal of a signboard in accordance with the act of preserving the jointly owned property is that the defendant exclusively occupies and uses the signboard of this case, the ownership and management of the condominium buildings.