However, the execution of the above sentence shall be suspended for a period of two years from the date this judgment became final and conclusive.

[Basic Facts] D around October 2009, when acquiring and operating “G private house,” owned by E from Suwon-gu F. F. F. F. 601, Suwon-gu, Suwon-si, Suwon-si, and operated, D disposed of the said private house or letter to the Defendant through H, a private house or construction business operator around November 201, 201.

According to the H’s advice, the Defendant accepted the instant letter from D, performed internal repair and installation works, and operated them again, disposed of to others, and concluded an entrustment contract with D on November 23, 201, with D as profit-making devices.

In addition, the Defendant, instead of paying a separate acquisition price to D under the above contract, prepared a contract for a construction contract with D, in addition to D, even though it is expected to pay a KRW 500 million for the actual construction cost, on the ground that the Defendant was responsible for various public charges, such as building management fees, taxes, electricity and water bills, and interest on loans from financial institutions, and the Defendant was in progress with the Defendant’s funds, and the aforementioned expenses and profits in the process of disposal and disposal would be compensated for the said expenses and profits.

From that point of time, the Defendant: (a) completed the construction work on February 10, 2012; and (b) commenced business or friendship with the name of “IS” from February 14, 2012; (c) but (d) thereafter, the Defendant was also unable to seek any help from the purchaser; and (e) as a result, the Defendant continued to engage in business or friendship on August 2012.

In addition, the defendant, who was decided to commence an auction on December 6, 2012 upon the application of the Young-gu Agricultural Cooperatives as the party who was the party who was the party who was the party who was the party who was the party who was the party who was the party who was the party in the building, had the right of retention in the auction process using the construction contract written as above, and had the defendant paid the amount equivalent

Accordingly, the Defendant reported the lien in the above auction case on March 13, 2013, and on March 7, 2014, the highest price is the buyer at the sale date.