1. The defendant shall indicate the attached drawings (1), (2), (10), (7), (8), (9), and (9), among the four floors of real estate listed in the attached list.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff and D share in the same proportion the part (Ga) part (Ga) and 22.20 square meters (hereinafter referred to as “the part of the instant building”) connected in order to each point of the real estate 4 floors listed in the separate sheet, among the real estate indicated in the separate sheet.

B. The Defendant is occupying the instant building portion while operating a singing room with the trade name “E” in the instant building section.

[Reasons for Recognition] Uncontentious Facts, Gap evidence 1, 2, Eul evidence 1, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination:

A. According to the above facts, the defendant, the possessor of the part of the building of this case, shall deliver the part of the building of this case to the plaintiff seeking delivery as a co-owner's preservation act, except in extenuating circumstances.

B. As to this, the defendant asserts that since one of the co-owners of the building part of this case entered into a lease agreement with D and possessed the building part of this case under such lease agreement, it cannot comply with the plaintiff's request for extradition.

Where two co-owners share equally one-half shares of each goods, a 1/2 equity right holder shall not exclusively use the goods without consultation with the other 1/2 equity right holder, and the other equity right holders may seek the exclusion of the exclusive use of the goods jointly owned by themselves as an act of preserving them.

(See Supreme Court Decision 2002Da57935 Decided November 13, 2003). D is the 1/2 co-owners of the building of this case and cannot exclusively use the building of this case without consultation with the other co-owners. Thus, even if the Defendant entered into a lease agreement with D on the part of the building of this case, it cannot be asserted against the Plaintiff seeking the delivery of the building of this case as an act of preservation of jointly owned property.

We do not accept the defendant's argument.

3. The decision is delivered with the assent of all participating Justices, on the ground that the plaintiff's claim is well-grounded.