beta
Text
1. Defendant B Co., Ltd. points out each of the real estate listed in the attached Table No. 1, 2, 3, 4, and 1 among the real estate listed in the attached Table No. 1.
Reasons
1. In light of the overall purport of the pleadings in the statement Nos. 1 and 2 as to the claim against Defendant Paco., the Plaintiff is recognized to have received and paid the sale price on February 8, 2012 by selling the real estate, the real estate listed in the separate sheet, which was owned by the Defendant Paco., Ltd., by means of the auction on real estate, and acquired the ownership.
The Plaintiff asserts that the Plaintiff, as the Defendant Log’s character, possesses approximately approximately KRW 172.5 square meters of the part on the ship (A) connected with each of the items in the attached Form No. 1, 2, 3, 4, and 1, which are the part on the storage of a single floor among the real estate listed in the attached Table No. 1, 2, 3, 4, and 1 (hereinafter “instant warehouse”), it shall deliver it to the Plaintiff, and that the Plaintiff should pay damages equivalent to the amount of KRW 200,000 per month for the said period as damages arising from the illegal possession from February 8, 2
However, at the date of pleading of this case, the Plaintiff recognized that the Plaintiff occupied and used all the buildings listed in the separate sheet from the date of acquisition of ownership until the date of acquisition of ownership, and filed the instant lawsuit in order to collect goods left alone by the above Defendant inside the building, and at present, asserted that the Plaintiff is in custody outside the building.
The request for the delivery of the warehouse of this case is premised on the premise that the above defendant currently occupies the warehouse of this case. Since the present possessor of the warehouse of this case is not the above defendant but the plaintiff, it is not acceptable to request the delivery of the warehouse of this case to the owner of the building and other articles.
In addition, the claim for damages arising from the illegal possession of the warehouse of this case occupied the warehouse of this case for the past period.
It should be premised on the fact that the Plaintiff is currently occupying or currently occupying, as seen earlier, from February 8, 2012 to the date of this case.