1. The plaintiff's claims against the defendants are all dismissed.

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

1. Facts of recognition;

A. A. Around February 12, 1986, Company I (hereinafter “I”) constructed the Yeongdeungpo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government F, the third floor above G’s ground, and the first floor above the ground (hereinafter “instant commercial building”) and sold each shop within the commercial building as a sectional building and completed registration of ownership preservation for each shop.

B. The Plaintiff is the owner of the first floor 115 shop among the instant commercial buildings, and Defendant C is the owner of the six underground stores among the instant commercial buildings, and Defendant B is the owner of the 20 underground stores among the instant commercial buildings.

C. Defendant D leased the underground stores of the instant commercial building from Defendant C and B and operated the instant commercial building, and Defendant E, upon request from Defendant D, installed the machinery room, electricity room, and corridor for the operation of the instant commercial building.

As an aggregate building, the area of the instant commercial building is 2,57.19 square meters in total; the area of the section for exclusive use in the Plaintiff’s store is 31.35 square meters in total; and the area of the section for common use is 15.33 square meters in total; the area of the section for exclusive use in the Defendant’s store is 863.08 square meters in total; and the area of the section for exclusive use in the Defendant’s store

[Ground of Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 4, Eul evidence Nos. 16 through 19 (including each number), and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The Plaintiff filed a claim against Defendant B, C, and E, without permission, installs and owns the entrances and doors of the purport of the claim and the two doors, asserting that Defendant B, C, and E occupy the part as stated in the claim(a) and (b). As an act of preserving the jointly owned property, the Plaintiff sought to remove the entrances, both doors, and the delivery of the said part(a) and (b).

However, there is no evidence to acknowledge that Defendant B and C have installed and owned entrances and two doors, and that they occupy the above (1) and (2) parts.

In the case of Defendant E, as seen earlier, the section for common use of the shopping mall of this case at D’s request.