1. The defendant has successively connected each point of the attached drawings Nos. 1, 2, 3, 4, and 1 among the area of 413.1 square meters in Daejeon Seosung-gu C.

The remaining designated parties and the Plaintiff (designated parties; hereinafter referred to as the “Plaintiff”) except for the designated parties D to the determination as to the cause of the claim are co-ownership share holders of the Daejeon Sung-gu Daejeon-gu C large 413m2 (hereinafter referred to as the “instant land”).

Of the instant land, there is a steel structure (hereinafter referred to as “instant structure”) on the ground level (A) in the part of the instant land, which connects each point of (a) to the boundary of the outer wall of the eight-story commercial building on the ground (hereinafter referred to as “instant commercial building”) and connects each point of the attached drawings Nos. 1, 2, 3, 4, and 1.

On April 12, 1999, the Defendant leased the instant structure from E Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “E”) with a deposit of KRW 20 million, and around that time, the Defendant occupied and used it until now.

By March 2016, the Defendant agreed to leave the instant structure from March 2016 (hereinafter referred to as “instant eviction agreement”) with the Plaintiff and the designated parties.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 4, 6 through 8, Eul evidence Nos. 2 and 4 (including branch numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply), the purport of the whole pleadings

B. According to the above facts of recognition, unless there are special circumstances, the defendant is obligated to leave the structure of this case from the structure of this case according to the eviction agreement with the plaintiff and the designated parties.

(Decree) Even if the eviction agreement of this case is not effective, since the defendant occupies the structure of this case on the land of this case, the defendant is obligated to withdraw the remaining designated parties and the plaintiff from the structure of this case except D, seeking preservation as co-owners of the land of this case). 2. Judgment on the defendant's assertion

A. The plaintiff 1 and the designated parties alleged by the defendant did not receive a successful bid for the instant land and commercial buildings at an auction and they did not receive a successful bid for the instant structure, and the structure of the instant building was acquired by winning a successful bid, and on the structure of the instant building to the defendant.