beta
Text
1. All of the plaintiffs' claims are dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiffs.
Reasons
1. On June 19, 2014, the Defendant occupies each of the real estate listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “each of the real estate of this case”) after purchasing each of the real estate listed in the 2,195m2, and the 1 through 4 of the attached sheet on the ground, in the D auction procedure with the Jeonju District Court, Jeonju District Court’s branch court, and the 2,195m2 and the 1 through 4 on the ground.
[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 2 (including each number if there are additional numbers), the purport of the whole pleadings
2. The plaintiffs' assertion and judgment
A. The alleged plaintiffs, as the lien holder of each real estate of this case, entered into a management contract with F from February 19, 2014, and had F manage each real estate of this case. The defendant, around June 19, 2014, removed the locks installed by the plaintiffs in the instant real estate from forced removal, and prevented them from entering each of the instant real estate by installing new locks brought by them and impeding their entry. Thus, the defendant is obligated to deliver each of the instant real estate to the plaintiffs.
B. In full view of the statements in the evidence Nos. 3 and 11 as well as the purport of the entire pleadings in the testimony of the witness G, the Defendant concluded a security service contract on June 19, 2014 with AWP Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “AWP”), and thereafter, the Defendant opened the locks installed at the entrance of each of the instant real estate at G at the request of G, a staff member of BWP, who visited each of the instant real estate, and G was transferred possession of each of the instant real estate with a new lock, and in this process, G was transferred the entrances of each of the instant real estate to the owner of each of the instant real estate by locking the entrances of each of the instant real estate, and in this process, F did not object to or raise any objection to it, and contrary to the above evidence No. 12, there is no counter-proof.
According to the above facts of recognition, the defendant shall perform in a peaceful and public manner each of the real estate of this case.