2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

2. Determination as to the possession of a thing which is the requirement of the establishment of a right of retention refers to an objective relationship in which, under the social norms, an article is deemed to be in a factual control of that person. It does not necessarily mean only physical and practical control over an article, but also means the time between the article and the person, spatial relations and principal rights relations, and the possibility of exclusion from others' control. However, in order to be of an objective relationship, there must be a need to exclude other person's interference at least in accordance with the social norms.

However, at the first day for pleading of this case, the Plaintiff only installed containers and pents outside the building of this case and did not reside or occupy inside the building of this case, and did not possess any key to enter the building of this case. According to the evidence No. 2, around 17:00 on December 15, 2012, the Plaintiff asserted the right of retention for the building of this case and prevented people from entering the building of this case, but the Plaintiff filed a summary order claiming for a summary order against the crime that interfered with the Defendant’s business, and was punished as a fine of three million won (the Plaintiff claimed a formal trial against the above summary order, but finally became final and conclusive after being sentenced to a fine of three million won). In light of the above facts of recognition, it is difficult to view that the evidence submitted by the Plaintiff alone does not constitute occupying the building of this case.