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

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

A. On July 18, 201, the Defendant Company was established as a company for the purpose of real estate sale and lease business, which is KRW 50 million (the total number of outstanding shares 5,000, par value 10,000). At the time of incorporation, Defendant B, Defendant C, and D respectively were registered as a representative director, and the register of shareholders of the Defendant Company entered 2,000 shares in the register of shareholders as Defendant D, 1,00 shares.

B. On July 26, 2011, Defendant Company completed the registration of ownership transfer for the land listed in paragraph (1) of the [Attachment List (hereinafter “instant land”) as of May 26, 201, based on sale and purchase conducted on May 26, 201. The Defendant Company newly constructed a building listed in paragraph (2) of the [Attachment List (hereinafter “instant building”) on the instant land and completed the registration of ownership preservation on April 19, 2012.

C. Meanwhile, from August 2010 to November 201, 201, the Plaintiff’s East F operated a wedding hall “N located in Yansan-gu, Seoul-si, and died on April 30, 2012. The Plaintiff came to have suspicion that the Defendant B, etc. was involved in the death of F from F’s bereaved family members, and Defendant B, who is the ownership of the instant land and buildings owned by the Defendant Company, was the Plaintiff and F, and the representative director of the Defendant Company, was merely the nominal lender, and was dissatisfied with the Defendant B by attaching a warning that the exercise of the right of retention on the entrance, etc. of the instant building.

Accordingly, Defendant B, as the representative director of the Defendant Company, filed a lawsuit claiming the confirmation of existence of the lien on the instant building (former District Court 2012Gahap5956) against the Plaintiff as the Jeonju District Court 2012Gahap556, Sept. 21, 2012, Defendant B filed a lawsuit claiming the confirmation of existence of the lien on the instant building (former District Court 2012Gahap5956). On the other hand, the Plaintiff, other than the instant building, also owns a limited liability company I (hereinafter “I”).