1. Of the instant lawsuit, the part of the claim for cooperation with the Corporation shall be dismissed.

2. The plaintiff's remaining claims.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is the owner under subparagraph D of the Gangnam-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government C Building (hereinafter “instant building”) and operates the “E Council member” in subparagraph D of the instant building. On August 1, 2012, the Defendant leased the instant building 9 floor G from F, the owner of the instant building, and operated the “H Council member” in subparagraph G of the instant building from that time.

B. After leasing the instant building G, the Defendant: (a) replaced the existing entrance doors of the instant building G with the automatic door of glass material; and (b) changed part of the boundary walls between the instant building G and corridor into a glass material.

[Ground of recognition] The fact that there is no dispute, Gap's 1 through 5 evidence, Eul's 1 through 3 evidence (if there is a serial number, including each number; hereinafter the same shall apply), the purport of the whole pleadings and arguments

2. The plaintiff is seeking cooperation from the defendant in implementing the construction works to restore the boundary wall of the building G of this case to its original state. We examine the legitimacy of this part of the lawsuit ex officio.

In civil procedure, the purport of the claim should be clearly identified so that the content and scope of the claim can be clearly identified, and the issue of whether the claim is specified is an ex officio investigation. Therefore, in cases where the purport of the claim is not specified, the court shall ex officio order the correction, regardless of whether the defendant's objection is raised, and in cases where the plaintiff's claim as to this part of the lawsuit is not complied with, the court shall dismiss the lawsuit (see Supreme Court Decision 2007Da53785, Nov. 12, 2009). The plaintiff's claim as to this part of the lawsuit cannot be deemed to have been specifically specified because the content and scope of the claim are unclear, and this court ordered the plaintiff to amend the above claim, but did not comply with it, this part of the lawsuit is unlawful.

2. Determination on the claim for reimbursement of expenses for reinstatement

A. The walls of the plaintiff's alleged corridor are to the section for common use.