유치권부존재확인
1. It is confirmed that the defendant's lien does not exist as to each item listed in the separate sheet.
2...
1. If the purport of the entire pleadings is added to the statements in Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 5 (including virtual numbers), the fact that the cooperative filed an application for voluntary auction with respect to each of the goods listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter "each of the goods of this case") owned by Eul (hereinafter "D") on November 18, 2015 and the decision to voluntarily commence the auction has been made on November 18, 2015 and the auction procedure thereon (hereinafter "the auction procedure of this case") has been in progress on September 29, 2016. The defendant asserted the claim for construction price of KRW 320,000,000 (excluding value-added tax) against D as the secured claim and reported the lien on September 7, 2017 at the auction procedure of this case on September 29, 2016.
2. Assertion and determination
A. Regarding the plaintiff's assertion that there is no right of retention for each of the goods of this case, the defendant, from around 2011 to around D, asserts that since he had a right of retention for each of the goods of this case, he had a right of retention for each of the goods of this case since he had established each of the goods of this case and possessed each of the goods of this case before the auction procedure of this case
B. In light of the records on the evidence No. 4 (the defendant submitted the contract of June 1, 2016, which was after the commencement of the auction procedure of this case upon reporting the lien at the auction procedure of this case), it is not sufficient to view that the defendant had a claim against D prior to the commencement of the auction procedure of this case as alleged by the defendant, and there is no other evidence to prove otherwise. In addition, in order to establish and continue the lien for each of the goods of this case, the possession of each of the goods of this case is necessary.