유치권 부존재 확인
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
(2) As seen earlier, it should be deemed that the right of retention has been restored because it did not lose possession (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 2003Da46215, Feb. 27, 2004; 2011Da72189, Feb. 9, 2012). As seen earlier, it is reasonable to view that the right of retention, which was retroactively deprived of possession, was restored to its original status, because the Defendant, while asserting the right of retention over the entire building of this case around 2010, was deprived of possession, but the execution of the provisional disposition prohibiting the transfer of possession was completed after winning the lawsuit on the merits and recovering the occupation that was deprived of possession around June 20, 2018.
B. The plaintiff asserted that there is no secured claim on the real estate of this case, and that the secured claim on the construction cost case claimed by the defendant was merely rendered without pleadings (Seoul Central District Court 2009Da128657) due to the failure of F to respond appropriately, and the real value is limited to 65% (1,367,080,000 won =2,103,200,000 won *65%) of the height of the structural construction performed by the defendant. The plaintiff asserted that there is no secured claim if the defendant offsets the F's delayed payment from the construction cost, the secured claim against F caused by delay of the structural construction.
According to Gap evidence No. 6 (subcontract), the construction period for the defendant F is about seven months from December 1, 2007 to June 31, 2008, and the contract amount is about 2,103,200,000 won, the contract amount is about 25 days in cash and the compensation rate for delay is about 1/100 (hereinafter "the subcontract in this case"). Article 24 of the contract in this case, where the construction is deemed to have been delayed due to the following reasons (such as the delay of the supply of natural disasters and access restrictions, the delay of materials to be paid by F, the delay of construction or the suspension of construction due to reasons attributable to F, or any other reasons not attributable to the defendant's liability), the reasonable number of days shall not be included in the number of days in the relevant days: