beta
Text
1. All of the plaintiff's claims are dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. E-main apartment in Yeongdeungpo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government D was built as a parking lot for the underground floor and the 2 underground floor from the 16th underground floor to the 4th underground floor, the 1st underground floor from the 16th underground floor, the 3th underground floor from the 1st floor to the 3rd underground floor (hereinafter “instant E”) and the 4th to the 16th residential apartment from the 4th ground;
(hereinafter referred to as "the aggregate building of this case" as a whole. (b)
The Plaintiff is the co-owner of multiple shopping districts, including the first floor No. 2, among the instant E shopping districts, and Defendant B is the co-owner of the first floor No. 95, and Defendant C is the lessee of the first floor No. 30, and the Defendants jointly operate the “F real estate” under subparagraph 30 of the first floor No. 30 and the “Gmast” under subparagraph 95 of the first floor.
C. In the center of the main entrance and exit of the instant building, the column (hereinafter “instant prop-supported signboard”) which is a concrete and steel aluminium structure was installed on the ground of 1.59 square meters in the connected part of the ship (B) with each point connected in order, which is the main entrance and exit of the instant building, as the center line of the main entrance and exit of the instant building, was attached with the trade name of “Hweurbook” attached to the instant prop-supported signboard.
Defendant B filed a lawsuit against Hwa Holdings Co., Ltd. seeking removal, etc. of the instant prop signboards (Seoul Southern District Court 201Gadan98680, Nov. 30, 2012) and rendered a favorable judgment on Nov. 30, 2012, Defendant B removed the instant prop signboards based on the judgment of the first instance court, which was revoked by the first instance court, in Seoul Southern District Court 2013Na77, the appellate court of the instant case. The judgment of the first instance became final and conclusive on Feb. 13, 2014 (Supreme Court Decision 2013Da216099).
[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 4, 6, 8, 13 and Eul evidence Nos. 3 (including each number; hereinafter the same) and the purport of the whole pleadings.