1. The part of the judgment of the court of first instance, which included the selective claim of the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) added in the appellate trial.

1. The contents to be stated in this part of the basic facts are identical to the part of the judgment of the court of first instance, and thus, they are quoted in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. As to the principal claim

A. The gist of the parties’ assertion 1) The object of each of the instant lease contracts is the land Nos. 1 and 2 of the instant case. Nevertheless, the Defendant, other than the instant land Nos. 1 and 2, is obliged to return the amount equivalent to the rent for the instant land to the Plaintiff without any legal ground, by occupying the instant land without permission from May 20, 2015 to September 14, 2016, when the Plaintiff’s employees suspended parking on each of the instant land, from May 20, 2015, and returned the instant land to the Plaintiff, thereby gaining profits equivalent to the rent for the instant land subject to the instant lease. Accordingly, the Defendant is obliged to return the Plaintiff the entire amount equivalent to the rent for the instant land subject to the instant lease to the Plaintiff without any legal ground. Accordingly, the Defendant is obliged to return all of the instant land possession to the Plaintiff from May 20, 2015, each of the instant land occupied by the Plaintiff.

Even if only the land Nos. 1 and 2 of the instant land among each of the instant lands is subject to each of the instant lease agreements, as alleged by the Plaintiff, the Plaintiff granted the Defendant, who manages the instant on-road parking lot, the right to use the said land free of charge.

(b) there is no particular dispute between the parties to the facts of recognition, or Gap's evidence 5 to 10, 12, 14, 16, 23 to 26, Eul's evidence 1 to 10, 46, 47, 52;