1. Revocation of the first instance judgment.

2. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is the owner of each real estate listed in the separate sheet 1 and 2, and the Defendant is the owner of 3 real estate listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant subparagraph”), and the designated person who is the Defendant’s spouse operates the beauty room at the same place.

Attached Form

Each real estate listed in the list is a sectionally owned building, which is part of the E-ground shopping mall (hereinafter referred to as the "commercial building in this case"), in Chuncheon, an aggregate building.

B. At the time of the construction of the instant commercial building, there was a partition wall (a 305 cm in height, 239 cm in height, 10 cm in thickness) and steel door (a 100 cm in height, 210 cm in height, 44 cm in thickness) from the floor to the ceiling at the location of each point in order of 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, and 1, which is the boundary of the corridor of the instant building and the second floor of the instant commercial building owned by the Defendant at the time of the construction of the instant commercial building.

(hereinafter referred to as the “instant stone wall” in total of the above stone walls and steel doors. D.

The Defendant removed the instant tiny wall without the consent from the sectional owners of the instant commercial building, and installed a glass wall (hereinafter referred to as “the instant glass wall” in total, of alinium sium 105cm, 239cm, 239cm in length, 10cm in thickness), glass wall (1cm in thickness), glass door (85cm in length, 210cm in length, 1cm in thickness), and 1cm in place.

[Ground for Recognition: Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1, 2, and 3, evidence 9-1, 3-3, purport of the whole pleadings]

2. The parties' assertion

A. The Plaintiff’s tin wall of this case constitutes a common area, which constitutes a partition wall that constitutes the boundary between the corridor of the second floor of the commercial building of this case, which is the common area, and the Defendant’s section for exclusive use. The Defendant removed the instant tin wall without the consent of the other sectional owners, and installed the instant tin wall without permission.