유치권부존재 등
1. It is confirmed that there is no lien for the Defendant in respect of the buildings listed in [Attachment List 2].
2...
1. Presumed facts
A. On April 18, 2008, the Plaintiff entered into a mortgage contract with the obligor B as to each of the real estates listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “each of the instant real estates”) and the building among them (hereinafter “instant building”) with the maximum debt amount of 2.34 billion won, and the mortgage contract with the obligor B, and completed the registration of the establishment of a neighboring mortgage under the Plaintiff’s name on April 21, 2008.
B. The Plaintiff filed an application for voluntary auction to Daejeon District Court C with respect to each of the instant real estate based on each of the instant collateral, and on January 10, 2014, upon receiving a decision to commence the auction of real estate from the above court, and the registration of the entry in the decision to commence the auction was completed on the same day.
(hereinafter “instant auction procedure” (hereinafter)
D On November 26, 2014, at the instant auction procedure, filed a lien report on the instant building by asserting that B owns KRW 980 million for the claim for construction cost due to the extension and large-scale repair works of the instant building with respect to B.
The Plaintiff asserted that “D’s claim for construction price claim against D is nonexistent, and D’s right of retention is not recognized because D did not occupy the building of this case,” as a mortgagee of the instant building in person or in subrogation of B, and filed a lawsuit for confirmation of existence of D’s right of retention as the court 2014Gahap108656. The court rendered a judgment accepting the Plaintiff’s claim on June 11, 2015, and the said judgment became final and conclusive around that time.
E. On August 28, 2015, the Defendant, as the Plaintiff’s ASEAN, filed a report on the lien on the instant building (hereinafter “instant lien”) with respect to the instant building, asserting that B had a claim for construction cost due to the removal and repair of the first floor of the instant building and the repair work in the instant auction procedure.
[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 3 (including virtual number), the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Determination
A. The Plaintiff’s claim is first filed in a passive lawsuit for confirmation.