beta
Text
1. The Plaintiff:
A. Defendant C is each indicated in the attached Form 1-4, and 1, which is installed on the ground of 25,532 square meters in Ansan-si.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. On November 17, 2016, the Plaintiff completed the registration of ownership transfer for reasons of public sale on October 27, 2016, with respect to the share of 323/25532 (hereinafter “E”) owned by E limited partnership companies (hereinafter “E”), among the share of 25,532 square meters (hereinafter “instant land”).
B. On the ground of the instant land, the containers listed in Paragraph (a) of Section 1 (hereinafter “instant container”) owned by the Defendant Association B (hereinafter “Defendant Association”) are installed, and Defendant C occupied and used the instant container.
【Ground of recognition】 The fact that there is no dispute, entry of Gap Nos. 1-3, the purport of the whole pleadings
2. According to the above facts finding as to the cause of the claim, barring any special circumstance, the Plaintiff, as a right holder of the instant land, filed the instant claim as an act of preserving jointly owned property, and the Defendant C is obligated to withdraw the instant container, and the Defendant C is obligated to remove the instant container and deliver the part of the land on which the instant container was installed to the extent that 25.56m2 is located.
3. The Defendants asserted that the Defendants did not have any obligation to comply with the instant claim, since they concluded a lease agreement on E and the instant land, which is the former owner of the instant shares, and the Defendant Union occupied and used the instant land as a legitimate lessee.
According to the evidence No. 1, the defendant union entered into a lease contract with E for a lease deposit of KRW 20 million with respect to the size of 330 square meters among the instant land during the period from February 1, 2016 to January 31, 2031, with the term of lease contract for the use of a chartered bus and for the installation of containers for the purpose of the office. However, it is recognized that the defendants cannot oppose the plaintiff newly acquired the instant shares based on the above land lease contract concluded with E.