1. The plaintiff's claim against the defendants is dismissed.

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

1. Basic facts

A. D from August 2014, the owner of the real estate listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant building”) leased the said building from E, the owner of the said real estate as indicated in the separate sheet, and has been operating the “The Vice Director of the National Tax Service” (hereinafter “the Vice Director of the National Tax Service”).

B. On March 31, 2018, D entered into a lease agreement with the Plaintiff, one of its creditors, to transfer all the lease rights and facilities of the Third Deputy Director, and to transfer them on April 9, 2018.

C. On April 17, 2018, D entered into a lease agreement on behalf of the Plaintiff with E to lease the instant building from E amounting to KRW 20 million, monthly rent of KRW 20 million. D.

D up to August 19, 2018, it was locked while operating the Deputy Director of the Rural Affairs Office of this case.

E. The Defendants are parents of D.

【Ground for Recognition: Facts without dispute, Gap 1, 3 (including virtual numbers), the purport of the whole pleadings】

2. The assertion and judgment

A. On April 17, 2018, D: (a) transferred the instant license to the Plaintiff; (b) on August 21, 2018, transferred the instant license to the third Deputy Director; and (c) on August 21, 2018, the instant license was transferred to the third Deputy Director; and (d) on August 19, 2018, contact was interrupted while operating the third Deputy Director.

The Defendants, the parents of D, even though they did not have any right to D with respect to the Third Deputy Director, was removed from the 3rd Deputy Director, without any authority, on September 8, 2018, on the grounds that they opened the 3rd Deputy Director, the 3rd Deputy Director, and cut off the 2nd outside the 3rd Deputy Director without any authority, and cut off the 3rd Deputy Director, and corrected, block, and marking the entrance door with locks, thereby hindering the Plaintiff’s operation of the

Accordingly, the plaintiff suffered losses equivalent to KRW 10,000,000,000 in the market price of the second outdoor machine for the third secretary, and the plaintiff did not operate his business and paid KRW 2,00,000 per month and did not obtain operating profit of KRW 10,000,000 per month, that is, losses of KRW 12 million per month.

Therefore, the Defendants jointly and severally deliver to the Plaintiff the instant building from the next day after the delivery of a copy of the complaint and the complaint of this case.