1.The part of the judgment of the court of first instance against the principal claim shall be modified as follows:

In the principal suit, 225,00 won of the cost of enforcement.

1. Basic facts

A. C on November 1, 2006, acquired the ownership of Embel in Ulsan-gun Libera (hereinafter “the instant telecom”).

B. On February 28, 2007, the Defendant completed the move-in report to the instant mother, and on June 14, 2007, G filed a business registration with the trade name of “M” by having the said mother mother mother mother mother mother as its place of business as its place of business and operated a lodging business.

C. On February 28, 2007, the agreement was made on June 12, 2007, and the agreement was made on June 12, 2007.

On February 28, 2007, the lease agreement between C and the defendant was made up in terms of KRW 130,000,000,000 for the lease deposit without monthly rent, as the part to be leased between C and the defendant.

On June 12, 2007, the lease agreement was made between C and G, with the indication of real estate, the monthly rent of KRW 1.5 million, the lease deposit of KRW 30 million, and the lease term of KRW 24 months from June 12, 2007.

The Plaintiff received a decision of permission for sale from the Ulsan District Court H to the instant telecom, and paid the sale price on May 16, 2014, thereby acquiring the ownership of the said telecom.

E. On May 16, 2014, the Defendant continuously occupied and used approximately KRW 99 square meters of the interior part of the first floor of the Maurel ( approximately 30 square meters; hereinafter “instant indoor room”) even after the Plaintiff acquired the ownership of the instant Maurel.

F. On June 10, 2014, the Plaintiff filed an application with the Ulsan District Court for an order to deliver real estate for the instant franchise (Ulsan District Court J), and the said court rendered a decision to accept the application on July 28, 2014.

Therefore, the defendant appealed (Ulsan District Court 2014Ra140), and the above court dismissed it on May 7, 2015.

On May 17, 2015, the Defendant removed from the inner room of this case.

On May 19, 2015, the Plaintiff executed an order to deliver the said real estate.

(The grounds for recognition) Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1 to 6, 8, 9, 11, 13, 22, 32, 34, 37, and Eul evidence 1 to 1.