1. The Defendants shall change the section for common use of the building listed in the attached Table 1 and the entrance doors of the attached Form B and C.

1. Basic facts

A. Defendant B is the owner of the Fhodong-gu E Commercial Building (hereinafter “instant building”) which is an individual store in the Goyang-gu, Young-gu, Busan (hereinafter “instant building”); Defendant C and D are the lessees who leased the instant store from Defendant B.

B. The Plaintiff is the owner of Gho Lake, a store immediately adjacent to the instant store (hereinafter “the instant store”). The said G is the exclusive area of 53.92 square meters, the public area of 6.0393 square meters, and the share of the site is 22.7242 square meters.

C. The instant building is a Class II neighborhood living facility with the second floor, and the exterior of the first floor of the instant building, including the outer walls of the instant store and the next shop, is a glass wall.

Defendant C and D, with the consent of Defendant B, divided the instant stores into two separate stores, and opened separate entrances on the outer glass wall of the instant building as shown in the separate drawings B and C in addition to the existing entrances in order to have access to the said separated stores.

E. At one of the separated stores of this case, Defendant C and D operate a licensed real estate agent office, and at the rest of one.

F. The Defendants, while opening each entrance of this case on the external glass wall of the building of this case, did not undergo a resolution of an assembly by a majority of not less than 3/4 of sectional owners and voting rights as stipulated in Article 15(1) of the Act on the Ownership and Management of Aggregate Buildings (hereinafter “the Aggregate Buildings Act”).

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 11, Eul evidence Nos. 1 and 2, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination as to the claim

A. In full view of all the relevant legal principles regarding the determination of the cause of the claim (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 94Da50380, Sept. 10, 1996; 2012Da8826, Nov. 28, 2013), the instant building is an aggregate building prescribed by the Aggregate Buildings Act, and the external glass wall of the said building is the same.