1. All appeals filed by the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) against the instant principal lawsuit and counterclaim are dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be the principal lawsuit.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is a legal entity that carries out an engineering work, etc., and the Defendants co-own-gu D’s land and its ground building (hereinafter “D’s land”) at the time of port.

B. On April 6, 2018, the Plaintiff received a contract on June 16, 2018, setting the construction price of the project for remodeling the Nam-gu F Housing (hereinafter “F Housing”) at the time of port from E, as KRW 63,000,000 for the construction cost, and as the completion date of construction on June 16, 2018.

(hereinafter “instant remodelling project”). (c)

On April 19, 2018, the Plaintiff entered into a contract with E for the installation of a charnel part of the fence that leads to F housing among the D site’s wall (hereinafter “instant wall”) and for the removal and re-installation of the fence and toilets that lead to F housing among the fences on the south-gu G ground at port (hereinafter “the instant fence”) on April 19, 201, and removed the instant fence, etc. on May 3, 2018.

The Defendants temporarily installed a network at the location where the instant fence was installed.

E. On June 18, 2019, E sent to the Plaintiff a document evidencing that the instant remodeling project contract and the instant aggregate expansion contract are terminated.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap 2, 7, 8, 10 to 13 evidence, Eul 2 evidence (including each number; hereinafter the same shall apply) and images, Gap E, H, and witness I of this Court, each of the testimonys and arguments, as a whole,

2. The assertion and judgment

A. As the Plaintiff’s assertion 1 of the parties concerned, the Plaintiff removed the instant fence and agreed to install a new fence in a straight line due to the narrow darbing of the instant fence, and accordingly, contracted for the construction of the instant darbing. Since the removal of the instant fence, the Defendants demanded the installation cycle of the fence in the same form as the instant fence without disregarding the aforementioned agreement, and installed the relevant darb.