1. The plaintiff's appeal and the plaintiff's claim expanded in the trial are all dismissed.

2. Demanding and expanding the costs of appeal.

1. The reasoning for the court’s explanation concerning this case is as follows, and all other parts of the judgment of the court of first instance except for the dismissal or addition of part of the judgment of the court of first instance are the same as the reasoning for the judgment of the court of first instance. Thus, it is acceptable to accept it as it is in accordance with the main sentence of

[The part to be removed or added] Each “each of the instant real estates” in the 3th page 13-15, shall be considered as “each of the instant real estates.”

The 4th page 15-18 acts are as follows.

② From April 4, 2014, the day following the completion date of the registration of provisional seizure of this case, until November 7, 2014, eight households (Nos. 201, 203, 605, 701, 703, 803, 804, 902) out of the instant real estate have not been leased, and the sum of damages equivalent to the rental profits accrued from the provisional seizure of this case’s real estate was 31,520,00 won (No. 61,520), the “principal lawsuit” in Section 2 of Section 6 shall be deemed to be “principal lawsuit”.

Part 7 12-13 adds “A evidence 19, A’s evidence 20-1 to 8, and A’s evidence 21-1 to 8.”

In the 7th page 13-14, "4 households" shall be changed to "8 households."

Each "certificate of master" in Part 7, part 18, part 8, and part 12 shall be raised as "certificate of admission".

2. If so, the part of the claim for the cancellation of provisional seizure and cancellation costs in the lawsuit of this case is unlawful, and it is dismissed as the remaining claims against the defendants of this case are all without merit. The judgment of the court of first instance is just in conclusion, and it is so decided as per Disposition by the plaintiff's appeal and the plaintiff's claim expanded in the trial.