유치권 부존재 확인
1. It is confirmed that the Defendants’ lien does not exist with respect to real estate listed in the separate sheet.
2...
1. Basic facts
A. On September 29, 2014, the Plaintiff, the owner of each real estate listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant real estate”) (hereinafter “Nonindicted Company”) established a collateral of KRW 600 million with respect to the instant real estate at the Industrial Bank of Korea in order to guarantee loan obligations.
B. On April 6, 2016, the Industrial Bank of Korea applied for a voluntary auction to Daejeon District Court Support E on the instant real estate based on the foregoing right to collateral security and completed the registration of the entry of the decision to commence auction on April 6, 2016.
Auction Procedure on Real Estate in this case was conducted by combining Daejeon District Court F and G cases.
(hereinafter “instant auction”). C.
On June 27, 2016, the Industrial Bank of Korea transferred the above right to collateral security to the Plaintiff, and the Plaintiff acquired the above right to collateral security in accordance with Article 8 of the Asset-Backed Securitization Act.
On September 29, 2016, the Defendants asserted that “the construction of the instant real estate and the prevention of soil erosion by a company outside the jurisdiction was performed, and was not paid KRW 300 million for the construction cost,” and reported the lien in the auction procedure.
【Ground for Recognition: Facts without dispute, Gap 1-3 evidence (including a provisional number; hereinafter the same shall apply), the purport of the whole pleadings】
2. The assertion and judgment
A. The summary of the Plaintiff’s assertion 1) The Defendants did not possess the instant real estate, and there is no secured claim in the lien claimed by the Defendants. (2) The Defendants, around June 9, 2014, contracted out by the Nonparty Company for the reorganization of the instant real estate and the civil engineering works for the prevention of soil erosion, and completed the construction works on October 14, 2014. Of which they did not receive KRW 300 million, the Defendants held a claim for the construction price of KRW 300 million against the Nonparty Company.
The defendants shall prepare for the non-party's failure to receive the construction cost at the time of the commencement of construction and the lapse of two months.