2. With respect to cases of application for the suspension of compulsory execution 2018 Chicago47, May 18, 2018

A. The Defendant: (a) purchased each of the instant houses located in D and 8 lots of land (hereinafter “each of the instant lands”; and (b) purchased each of the instant houses among the instant houses (hereinafter “each of the instant houses”) by winning a successful bid in the senior auction procedure for real estate rent E in order to support the High Government District Court in order to pay in full, and acquired the ownership thereof.

B. The Defendant filed an application with the Plaintiff for provisional injunction against obstruction of passage and access to each of the instant buildings with the competent court 2017Kahap5128. The Plaintiff leased KRW 700 million to F who implemented the construction of each of the instant buildings from each of the instant land owned by the Plaintiff and the actual owner of each of the instant land. Since F renounced the Plaintiff’s right to implement the construction of each of the instant buildings and subsequently became the executor of the instant construction, the Plaintiff had a claim for return of unjust enrichment equivalent to the construction cost against G or the actual owner, who was the owner of each of the instant buildings, and F and H companies, who were the owner of each of the instant buildings, and the Plaintiff claimed a lien on each of the instant buildings on November 17, 2017 on the ground that he/she acquired the construction cost claim and lien from Nonparty I Construction and transferred I, and the said court did not have any relation that the Plaintiff’s claim on November 17, 2017, which did not constitute a secured claim for the lien against each of the instant buildings, as alleged otherwise.

2. The Plaintiff has access to each of the instant buildings owned by the Defendant, installed containers, or fluored cards and posters, such as windows, outer walls of the building, and vegetable hulls.