1. The Defendants are each indicated in the separate sheet No. 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 10, 9, and 2 among the second floor of the building listed in the separate sheet.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. D on March 20, 2019, leased 2nd floor G heading 40 square meters of multi-family houses located in Gangseo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government F (hereinafter “instant building”) from E during the period from May 7, 2019 to May 7, 2020.

D paid the deposit to E, and resided in the building of this case upon delivery.

B. D died on July 25, 2019.

On August 8, 2007, the plaintiff married with D on August 8, 2007, and succeeded to D's property together with D's children.

Defendant B is a partner of Defendant D, and Defendant C is the wife of Defendant B.

The defendants currently occupy the building of this case.

(A) The Defendant brought the furniture, etc. of the instant building and changed the current identification number. In addition, Defendant B filed a lawsuit against E seeking a security deposit for lease, and then pending the lawsuit. [The grounds for recognition] The fact that there is no dispute, Gap 1 through 4, 11, 12, and Eul 2 and 14, and the purport of the entire pleadings and arguments.

2. According to the facts found in the judgment as to the cause of the claim, the Defendants are obligated to deliver the instant building to the Plaintiff who jointly succeeded to the right of lease D, barring any special circumstance.

As to this, the Defendants asserted that the Plaintiff cannot make the instant claim against the Defendants since there exist other inheritors of D, in addition to the Plaintiff.

However, the right of lease jointly inherited by the Plaintiff is a right to use and benefit from the subject matter. If the Defendants interfere with it without a legitimate title, the Plaintiff may seek the exclusion of disturbance even if it is only one of the co-inheritors. Therefore, the aforementioned assertion by the Defendants cannot be accepted.

Furthermore, the Defendants asserted that they transferred the right of lease to Defendant B before or after the death of Defendant B, but it is insufficient to recognize that D transferred the right of lease to Defendant B only by the evidence submitted by the Defendants.

Therefore, the above assertion by the Defendants cannot be accepted.

3...