2...

A. On June 13, 2012, the Plaintiff completed the registration of the establishment of a joint creation of a mortgage on each land, etc. listed in the separate sheet, which is owned by C (hereinafter “instant land”), with respect to the debtor C, the maximum debt amount of KRW 169 million, and the joint creation of a mortgage as the plaintiff of the right to collateral security.

B. D filed an application for voluntary auction on July 28, 2015 with respect to the instant land, and on July 29, 2015, upon which the decision to commence voluntary auction was rendered on July 29, 2015 (hereinafter “instant first auction”), and the entry registration was completed on the same day.

C. In the first auction procedure of this case on August 26, 2015, Defendant A reported a lien based on the claim for construction cost amounting to KRW 488,800,000,000 under the construction contract concluded with F during the first auction procedure of this case, asserting that “F, the purchaser of the land of this case, ordered the construction work to Defendant B, and Defendant B subcontracted the retaining wall construction work to Defendant A,” and Defendant B reported a lien based on the claim for construction cost amounting to KRW 87,00,000 under the construction contract concluded with F during the first auction procedure of this case on February 19, 2016.

D on June 10, 2016, the application for the first auction was withdrawn.

On July 5, 2016, the Plaintiff filed an application for voluntary auction with respect to the instant land on July 5, 2016, and rendered a decision to commence voluntary auction to G in this court on July 6, 2016 (hereinafter “instant second auction”), and the entry registration was completed on the same day.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 4, Eul evidence No. 2, significant facts, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination on this safety defense

A. Since Defendant A’s main defense of safety had withdrawn the application for the first auction of this case and completed the auction procedure, the lawsuit of this case has no interest in confirmation.

In addition, when comparing the secured claim amount of the plaintiff and the minimum sale price of the land of this case in the second auction procedure of this case, the plaintiff can obtain sufficient satisfaction of the claim in the second auction procedure of this case, so there is no standing to sue to institute the lawsuit of this case against the plaintiff.

B. The lien holder of the judgment shall be one’s secured claim.