1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On August 21, 2006, the Defendant rendered a permit for gratuitous use of the instant building until September 1, 2016, on condition that the building of the 22-ground parking lot in Jung-gu, Seoul (hereinafter “instant building”) was built and donated to the Dongbu Construction Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Dongbu Construction”).

B. On August 21, 2006, Dongbu Construction leased part of the first, second, third, and fourth floors of the instant building to the Plaintiff. The Plaintiff sub-leaseed about 350 merchants of the instant building to approximately 1,2, and third floors.

C. The Plaintiff named the instant building as a shopping mall (U.S.) and affixed signboards and advertisements outside the building, and set up various signs on the passage, etc. inside the building.

On the other hand, on October 29, 2014, the Plaintiff entered into a lease agreement in lieu of the previous lease agreement with the building building building building building building building building building building building building building building building building building building building building building building building building building building building building building building building building building building building building building building building building building building building building building

E. On September 1, 2016, the Plaintiff’s term of lease expired due to the expiration of the period of permission for free use of and benefit from construction of East and East Construction.

Around that time, the Defendant requested the return of the instant building to the Dongbu Construction without any possessor, and the Dongbu Construction demanded the Plaintiff to cooperate with the return of the original state and the restoration of the facility to its original state. However, the Plaintiff rejected the delivery of the instant building by asserting the lien on the ground that the Plaintiff had the right to claim reimbursement of the necessary and beneficial costs for the instant building.

F. On August 30, 2016, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit to confirm the existence of the right of retention with the Seoul Central District Court against Seoul Central District Court (2016Gahap52296) and the lawsuit is pending in the first instance trial (2016Gahap5296). On the other hand, the Seoul Special Metropolitan City Facility Management Authority delegated with the public property management authority by the Defendant filed a lawsuit against the lessee of the instant building on September 2016.