1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

1. The grounds for the court’s explanation concerning the instant case are as follows: “1. Facts recognized” of the judgment of the court of first instance are modified to “1. Basic Facts” and “2.”

A. The part of the judgment on the request for delivery of a building is examined as set forth in the following Paragraph 2, and the defendant's new argument in the appellate trial is added with the reasoning of the judgment of the first instance except for the addition of the judgment as set forth in Paragraph 3, and thus, it is cited as it is in accordance with the main sentence of Article

2. The part to be mixd;

건물인도청구에 관한 판단 ⑴ 당사자들의 주장 ㈎ 원고 주위적으로, 원고는 이 사건 건물의 소유자로서 소유권에 기한 방해배제로서 이 사건 각 점포를 점유하고 있는 피고에 대하여 위 각 점포의 인도를 구한다.

Preliminaryly, the Plaintiff succeeded to the lessor status under the lease agreement concluded by the Defendant with respect to each of the instant stores, and terminated the lease agreement for each of the said stores on the grounds of the Defendant’s delinquency in rent for at least three years, and sought the delivery of each of the said stores.

㈏ 피고 ① 피고는 이 사건 각 점포를 상사유치권자이자 이 사건 건물의 임대권한을 양수한 G로부터 적법하게 임차하였으므로 원고의 청구에 응할 의무가 없다

In the first instance court, on the premise that a lease contract with G is concluded with regard to each of the instant stores, the Defendant asserted that G had the right to possess each of the instant stores, based on the commercial lien, and that G had the right to possess each of the instant stores. However, in the appellate court, it is unclear whether G had withdrawn the previous argument, and thus, it is still deemed that the said assertion has been maintained.

② Unless the right to lease the instant building is recognized to G, each of the instant stores is between the Defendant and E through D.