beta
Text
1. It is confirmed that the defendants' lien does not exist with respect to real estate stated in the attached list.
2...
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. The Plaintiff completed the registration of ownership transfer on December 2, 2013, after receiving a successful bid for the instant land in the Suwon District Court D, E (Joint), F (Joint), G (Joint), and H (Joint) Real Estate Auction case (hereinafter “instant auction”), which was conducted with respect to the instant land (hereinafter “instant land”), including six parcels of real estate (hereinafter “each of the instant real estate”).
B. On August 10, 2012, each of the instant real estate was registered as the entry of each decision on voluntary commencement of auction at the request of the Plaintiff, who is a mortgagee, and on July 30, 2012, each of the instant real estate was registered as the entry of each decision on voluntary commencement of auction at the request of the Plaintiff, and on July 30, 2012, on the land Nos. 2, 4, and
C. In the instant auction procedure, Defendant A Co., Ltd. reported a lien on March 29, 2013, and Defendant B Co., Ltd. on April 3, 2013, asserting that the instant land had a claim for construction cost, such as road construction works, etc., on each of the instant land. Accordingly, the Plaintiff filed an application for exclusion of the Defendants from reporting the above lien, and the Defendants submitted to the said auction court the document stating that the said auction court is claiming a lien only with respect to each of the instant land, which is six parcels of the instant land.
[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, part of Gap 2-5, and 7 (including each number), the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Claim against Defendant A corporation
A. Each of the instant real property indicated as the claim is the land on the road located within the site of the IP and thus, the actual defendant A did not perform road construction works, etc., and at the time of the voluntary decision to commence the auction on each of the instant real property, the defendant A corporation did not occupy it. Therefore, the non-existence of the right of retention alleged by the defendant A corporation as to each of the instant real property is confirmed.