1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. Basic facts

A. On February 15, 2007, the registration of ownership transfer was completed with respect to the buildings listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant building”) with the Plaintiff’s title 6/10 shares, and 4/10 shares in the Defendant’s name on February 15, 2007 with respect to the 4/10 shares in the said Defendant’s name. Since then, the registration of ownership transfer was completed in the name of the said principal corporation, a corporation due to the sale by voluntary auction on December 6, 2011.

B. The Defendant currently occupies 1, 3, and 5 floors among the instant buildings.

[Ground of recognition] A without dispute, entry of evidence No. 1, purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion is the owner of 6/10 shares in the building of this case. Since the Defendant without any title occupies the 1, 3, and 5 floors of the building of this case, the Defendant is obligated to deliver the 1, 3, and 5 floors of the building of this case to the Plaintiff who exercises the right to claim the exclusion of disturbance based on co-ownership of the building of this case.

B. As long as a registration of ownership preservation of real estate has been made, it shall be presumed that the title holder has ownership (see Supreme Court Decision 82Meu707, Sept. 14, 1982). However, since the ownership of a newly-built building is the original acquisition by the person who constructed it, if the title holder of the registration of ownership preservation of the building does not construct it, the presumption of the right to such registration is broken, and if the title holder does not build it, he/she must prove the fact that the title holder has lawfully acquired the ownership.

(See Supreme Court Decision 95Da30734 delivered on July 30, 1996). Meanwhile, in a case where a partnership aimed at operating a business acquires the ownership of real estate as a partnership's property or a partnership's property, it naturally becomes a combination of partnership's property. However, if the partnership did not make a combination registration and instead, made a joint registration of each share in its name under the name of union members, it should be deemed that the partnership held a title trust for each share to union members.

Supreme Court Decision 2006No. 1306.