A. On March 20, 201, the Plaintiff, a company engaging in construction business, entered into a contract for construction work with the Defendant for the construction of Bridge, which newly constructs real estate in the attached Form (hereinafter “instant real estate”) with the total construction cost of KRW 2,640,00,000 on the land outside Pyeongtaek-si and two parcels, including value-added tax (hereinafter “instant real estate”).

B. The Plaintiff continued construction under the said contract and completed construction on December 27, 201, and the Defendant paid only the total construction cost of KRW 1,568,00,000 among the construction cost, and did not pay the remainder of KRW 1,072,00,000. On December 30, 2014, the Plaintiff prepared and delivered a letter to pay the remainder to the Plaintiff by June 30, 2015.

C. The Plaintiff occupies one office space among the instant real estate newly built from December 27, 201, which was the date of completion of construction as a means to receive the remaining construction balance, to the present date, and continues to possess the remainder by allowing the Defendant to use it.

Therefore, there exists a lien with respect to the Plaintiff’s instant real estate as secured claim the amount of KRW 1,072,00,000 and damages for delay calculated at the rate of KRW 5% per annum from July 1, 2015 to the date of full payment. However, since the Defendant is disputing the existence and scope of the Plaintiff’s lien, there is a benefit to seek confirmation.

2. Article 208 (3) 1 of the Civil Procedure Act and the main sentence of Article 257 (1) of the same Act: