2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the Plaintiff.

A. On May 25, 2004, Defendant D, on May 25, 2004, determined payment order and C’s exercise of lien, etc., is the Busan Shipping Daegu E and F’s ground Gelel (hereinafter “instant telecom”).

(2) On November 3, 2006, the court ordered C to pay KRW 148,00,000 per annum from the day following the delivery date of the original copy of the instant payment order, and C to pay the above payment order was finalized on November 24, 2006, and C to pay the above payment order was finalized on November 24, 2006.

(3) The instant payment order (hereinafter “instant payment order”) C exercised the right of retention over the instant cartels with the claim for the payment of the above lighting construction cost against Defendant D as the secured claim, and Nonparty H Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “H”).

(B) While Defendant D’s claim for the construction cost of the instant franchise, as the secured claim, transferred the claim for the said construction cost and the lien to Defendant I during the course of exercising the lien on the instant franchise. B. The instant case 1) began with respect to the instant franchise, the Busan District Court’s branch branch branch’s G voluntary auction procedure and the K voluntary auction procedure, and finally L Co., Ltd (hereinafter “L”) was awarded a bid for the instant franchise around August 10, 2010.

2 L filed a lawsuit against C, Defendant I, etc. seeking confirmation of the non-existence of a lien. On April 2, 2011, following the filing of the lawsuit, L lost the possession of the instant maternity from C, Defendant I, etc., and accordingly, sought the return of the instant maternity, by means of a lawsuit for recovery of possession, on the ground that Defendant I lost L against L without permission.