1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

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

1. Basic facts

A. On January 15, 2010, the Plaintiff obtained permission from the Defendant to occupy and use “D, E, and E, 360 square meters” as an entrance to the said building as the owner of the building B and C, Nam-si.

B. Since then, on December 6, 2011, the owner G of the F-based building located in the building owned by the Plaintiff and the Plaintiff agreed to jointly occupy and use part of the building that the Plaintiff obtained permission, and the Defendant filed an application to change the permission to occupy and use the road with the Defendant. On December 6, 2011, the Defendant: (a) granted to the Plaintiff permission to occupy and use the place and area up to December 31, 2021, the place and area of the occupancy and use permission up to “Do, E, 354 square meters (excluding joint occupancy and use),” the place and area of the occupancy and use permission up to December 31, 2021; (b) granted to G the permission to occupy and use the road up to “D, E, 602 square meters (including 64 square meters for joint occupancy and use) for the period of occupancy and use permission up to December 31, 2021.

C. From 2013 to 2019, the Defendant imposed charges on the Plaintiff for road use following the above permission to occupy and use the road, but did not pay such charges to the Plaintiff.

Accordingly, on July 3, 2019, the Defendant notified the Plaintiff of the public auction that “if the Plaintiff fails to pay the fees for road use and additional dues from 2013 to 2019, the amount in arrears should be paid up to July 31, 2019, prior to the public auction of real estate, the Defendant shall pay the amount in arrears until July 31, 2019, and if the payment is not made within the said period, the public auction will be conducted in accordance with the relevant provisions, such as Article 61 (Public Auction) of the National Tax Collection Act.”

2. Determination on the legitimacy of the instant lawsuit

A. As the Plaintiff’s assertion 1 can revoke the existing permission to occupy and use a road, the Plaintiff agreed to jointly occupy and use with G and obtained new permission from the Defendant. As a result, the Plaintiff’s entry into and use of the building owned by the Plaintiff was lost, the Defendant should officially use the building as the entry to which the Plaintiff first permitted to occupy and use.