1. Revocation of a judgment of the first instance;

2. The Defendant shall have the Plaintiffs not less than 155.18 square meters of the underground floor among the buildings listed in the attached list.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiffs are divided owners of the buildings listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “multi-household housing in this case”). Plaintiffs A are divided into 102, Plaintiff B are 301, Plaintiff C are 302, and Plaintiff D are 401, respectively.

B. Multi-households in this case are multi-unit houses constructed on the ground level 1 and 5 above ground level , and there are parking lots on the first floor among the above ground level 1, and 8 households in total on the remaining 4 floors.

The defendant's wife G newly constructed the above multi-household house as the owner of the building, and obtained approval for use on December 29, 2003, and completed registration of preservation of ownership of each partitioned building on the ground floor around January 2004.

B. The underground floor 155.18 cubic meters of the instant multi-household house (hereinafter “instant underground floor”) is not included in the total floor area of the building permit.

The underground floor of this case was extended without permission at the time of new construction of multi-household houses, and it is not registered in the aggregate building ledger or the registration record of real estate.

C. G sold a partitioned building of 7 households except subparagraph 101 of the first floor, and G occupied and used the instant underground floor exclusively for the purpose of warehouse, etc. while residing with the Defendant, etc. (as to 101, May 10, 2004) (as to 101, the registration of ownership transfer was completed).

At the time of the construction of the instant multi-household, the underground floor was partitioned into walls and divided into two spaces, and was opened without entrance.

On the underground floor, stairs and corridors are connected to the underground floor.

E. The Defendant was a sectional owner of the instant multi-household 101, and lost ownership due to voluntary auction on December 2, 2014. As of the date of closing argument, the instant basement was occupied and used exclusively.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1-5, Gap evidence 2-2, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion and judgment

A. (1) The Plaintiff’s assertion was made.