1. The defendant points out of the real estate listed in the separate sheet Nos. 1, 1, 4, 3, and 1, respectively.

1. The Plaintiff’s determination as to the cause of the claim is the owner of the second floor among the real estate listed in the separate sheet No. 1 (hereinafter “instant building”), which is an aggregate building, and the Defendant is the owner of the second floor among the real estate listed in the separate sheet No. 1 (hereinafter “instant building”). The Defendant occupies the joint-use area indicated in the annexed sheet No. 2, which is the joint-use area of the instant building. (

(C) Therefore, as long as the Defendant did not assert or prove his/her possessory source, the Defendant is obligated to deliver the said room to the Plaintiff, who is the co-owner of the above security room.

2. On the part of the Defendant’s assertion, the Defendant concluded a contract with D (hereinafter “D”) which is the executor of the instant building, for the management of the instant building, and accordingly, asserts that the Defendant has the authority to occupy the said guard room for the management of the instant building.

On June 25, 2013, the Defendant entered into an entrustment contract (hereinafter “the first contract”) with D, a business proprietor who constructed the instant building on June 25, 2013, stating that “The period of management shall be one year from the date the Defendant started his/her business, but until the management is transferred to any other entity than D pursuant to Article 54 of the Enforcement Decree of the Housing Act,” and concluded an entrustment contract for the management of the instant building (hereinafter “the first contract”) with D on June 25, 2014, and “the period of management shall be one year from the completion of this contract, and shall be automatically renewed unless the parties do not notify the termination or cancellation in writing at least one month prior to the expiration of the contract,” and it is recognized that there was no written notification of the termination of the second contract between D and the Defendant.

However, in full view of the purport of the argument in Gap evidence No. 1, it can be acknowledged that a majority of the prospective occupants (households) of the instant building has already been occupied before the second contract was concluded.