1. It is confirmed that the Defendants’ lien on real estate listed in the separate sheet does not exist.

2...

1. Basic facts

A. Plaintiff A Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Plaintiff”) is the owner of shares in Q Q, Q, Q, and R forest in Q, and Plaintiff B is the owner of shares in Q, Q, 7979/16519, and forest land in Q, respectively.

B. The Plaintiffs newly constructed each of the buildings listed in the separate sheet on Q, R, and S’s ground (hereinafter “instant building”) at Q, R, and completed each registration of initial ownership in the name of the Plaintiff Company as to the buildings listed in the separate sheet 1 through 12, and the separate sheet 13 through 29, respectively, in the name of the Plaintiff Company.

C. On September 25, 2017, with respect to the instant building, a decision to voluntarily commence the auction was rendered via the Changwon District Court through the Youngwon Branch T on September 25, 2017, and the entry registration was completed on the same day.

From November to December, 2017 to the Changwon District Court, the Defendants prepared and submitted each lien registration statement with respect to the above Twit real estate auction case.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 3 (including paper numbers) and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. In a lawsuit seeking passive confirmation of relevant legal principles, if the Plaintiff alleged to deny the fact that the cause of debt occurred by specifying the Plaintiff’s claim first, the Defendant, the obligee, bears the responsibility to assert and prove the fact that the legal relationship exists. As such, in a lawsuit seeking confirmation of non-existence of the right of retention, the Defendant should assert and prove the existence of the subject matter of the right of retention, which

(see Supreme Court Decision 2013Da99409, Mar. 10, 2016). A person who acquired a lien may not claim his/her lien against a purchaser of an auction procedure, only after the registration of the decision on commencing auction was made.

(See Supreme Court Decision 2010Da84932 Decided April 10, 2014). B.

Defendant C and L, in determining the claim against Defendant C and L, have each claim for the construction cost against the Plaintiffs, and asserted that they occupy the instant building, but only the data submitted by the said Defendants are asserted.