Ustinov rented his three-room apartment

Ustinov handed over his three-room apartment, which belonged to him by right of ownership, to Gavrilov. Under the terms of the contract, Gavrilov was considered the employer, however, it was agreed that his wife, Anna Gavrilova, would live with him in the apartment as a regular user. The contract was concluded for a period of two years. Six months later, Gavrilov asked Ustinov to give permission to rent one room under a lease agreement to Kozlov, since it is difficult for their family to pay fees for using the apartment. Ustinov agreed to a lease agreement. After that, Gavrilov stopped paying fees for using the apartment. Due to the fact that the tenant had a debt for seven months, Ustinov demanded the termination of the contract of employment. When he came to his apartment, it turned out that Gavrilov himself had not lived in it for three months. His wife, Anna Gavrilova, explained to Ustinova that her husband had married another woman, moved to her apartment, and they were going to divorce. Gavrilova herself doesn’t work anywhere, so she can’t pay fees for using the living room for good reason. In addition, Ustinov discovered that the apartment was in very poor condition, a sink was broken in the bathroom, tiles were broken in the kitchen, wallpaper was spoiled in one of the rooms. Then Ustinov demanded from Anna Gavrilova and from Kozlov, who continued to live in this apartment, to pay off debt, to recover expenses associated with the repair of the apartment. Ustinov also announced to Gavrilova and Kozlov that he terminates the lease and rent agreements and demands that they release the living space. Anna Gavrilova responded to his demand that the disorder and damage to the apartment was caused by frequent visits to Kozlov by his friends, who constantly drink alcohol and make drunken fights. Due to the fact that Ustinov is the owner of the dwelling, he must bear the burden of its maintenance, as the rental agreement did not say that the current repairs will be made by the tenants. As for the debt on the use of housing, Ustinov entered into an agreement with her husband, who must pay the rent for the apartment. Kozlov replied that he regularly paid a fee for using his room to Gavrilov, and he was not obliged to pay for the repair of the apartment. Ustinov appealed to the court with a request to terminate the lease and rent agreements and to recover from Gavrilov, Gavrilova and Kozlov fees for the use of premises and expenses that Ustinov would have to incur for the repair of his apartment, while Ustinov believed that the defendants should answer jointly and severally.
What decision should a court make?