1. The Defendants are indicated in the separate sheet No. 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, and 2 among each land listed in the separate sheet to the Plaintiff.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On January 3, 2015, the Plaintiff specified and leased each of the lands listed in the attached Tables 1 and 2 (hereinafter “each of the instant lands”) to Defendant B as KRW 5 million in deposit and monthly rent of KRW 500,000 in KRW 500,000 (Additional Tax separately).

B. As indicated in paragraph (1) of this case, Defendant B, along with each of the points in the attached Form Nos. 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, and 2 as indicated in paragraph (1) of this case, deposited each of the instant land with approximately 14 meters in length, about 5 meters in average height, about 6 meters in width, and about 1, 2, 6, 7, and 1 in sequence connected each of the (B) parts of the facilities (a) with the same map No. 1, 1, 2, 3, 4, and 1 in sequence, as indicated in the attached Form No. 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, and 2, as indicated in the attached Form No. 1 of this case, installed a board roof container with approximately 1,36 m2,000 square meters in width, and installed and operated a steel scrap on the part (c) part (d) with each of the same map No. 13,4,14.

C. Around June 2016, Defendant B transferred the above solid facilities to Defendant C, and sublet each of the instant land without the Plaintiff’s consent.

The Plaintiff notified Defendant B of his intention to terminate the lease contract of each of the instant lands on the grounds of monthly delinquency in rent and without permission.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 5, purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination:

A. Judgment by confession of a claim against Defendant B (Article 208(3)2 of the Civil Procedure Act)

B. According to the facts of the above recognition of the claim against Defendant C, Defendant C, the possessor of each of the lands of this case, is obligated to remove the facilities indicated in paragraph (1) of the above Article on the ground of the land and restore them to its original state, and then deliver the land to the Plaintiff.

On the contrary, Defendant C asserted that each of the instant lands was sub-leased with the consent of the Plaintiff, but there is no evidence to acknowledge it.

3. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the ground that the plaintiff's claim against the defendants is with merit.