유치권부존재 확인
1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.
Purport of claim and appeal
1..
1. On September 19, 201, the Korean National Bank Co., Ltd. requested a voluntary auction as to each real estate listed in the separate sheet owned by Gwangju District Court Branch C (hereinafter “the entire real estate of this case,” and the part not presented in paragraph (5) of this case “the extension part of the building of this case”) on September 201, 201, and received voluntary auction order (B) from the above court on September 20, 201, as the mortgagee of the right to collateral security (Seoul District Court No. 17976, Jul. 30, 2007; maximum debt amount of KRW 624 million; the debtor C and joint collateral list No. 1 through 4).
(F) On December 16, 201, the Plaintiff acquired the right to collateral security and the right to collateral security from the said bank on December 16, 201.
On May 29, 2012, the Defendant reported the right of retention by designating KRW 154 million as the secured claim, which is held with respect to D (the owner C’s wife) as the lessee of the entire real estate of this case.
[Reasons for Recognition - Unsatisfy Facts, Gap evidence 1, Gap evidence 3 and 7, each of 1 to 4, part of witness E of the first instance trial, purpose of whole pleadings]
2. Determination as to the claim
A. The plaintiff's assertion that the plaintiff did not have the defendant's claim for the construction price against D, and that the defendant did not possess the real estate of this case before the commencement of the auction of this case, and therefore there is no right of retention of the defendant.
B. In the lawsuit for the passive confirmation of the burden of proof in the lawsuit for the first passive confirmation as to whether the lien has been established, if the plaintiff asserted to deny the fact that the cause of the right occurred by specifying the plaintiff's claim first, the defendant who is the right holder is liable to assert and prove the facts of the requisite of the right relationship. Thus, in this case, the defendant who claimed as the lien holder is liable to prove