1. The plaintiff's claim against the defendants (including the parties to the lawsuit and the intervenors) is dismissed.

2...

1. Basic facts

A. Three-ho Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Nonindicted Company”) is a company that constructs and sells BV 1 and 11 apartment buildings on the land of 30,225 square meters in Seocho-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government BT and 22,197 square meters in BU large scale (hereinafter “instant apartment buildings”) and one commercial building (hereinafter “instant old commercial building”).

B. At the time, the non-party company: (a) among the machinery rooms and transformation rooms of the previous commercial building of this case (1295 m2); (b) 1,236.33m2; (c) the three-story conference rooms (310, 208m2); (d) the management room (311, 88m2); and (e) the senior apartment registry (312, 225m2) as the ancillary welfare facilities of the previous apartment of this case; and (b) the remaining 59.57m2 among the above machinery rooms and transformation rooms (129.9m2); and (c) did not grant the share of the land as to the above machinery rooms and transformation rooms, 310, 311, and 312.

Each of the above sections for common use was registered in each of the respective sections for common use of the apartment and the apartment building of the Gu, and the building ledger of the Gu of this case was cancelled at the time the plaintiff removed the apartment building of this case, and the above section for common use of the Gu of this case was also cancelled.

There was no separate registration about it.

C. The Plaintiff is a reconstruction association established by the owner of the old apartment in around 2002 for the purpose of the apartment reconstruction project.

At the time, the owner of the previous commercial building in this case opposed to the reconstruction project, around 2007, the part of the site of this case, which is the site of the previous commercial building in Seocho-gu Seoul Metropolitan City, is divided and owned by the owner of the previous commercial building in this case, among the land of the previous apartment and the previous commercial building in this case, was owned by the owner of the previous commercial building in this case, and the partition of co-owned property, which is owned by the plaintiff (Seoul Central District Court 2003Gahap45156), was constituted (mediation in the partition of co-owned property in the

On the other hand, this is true.