1. It is confirmed that the defendant's lien does not exist as to each real estate listed in the separate sheet.

2...

1. Basic facts

A. On September 29, 2016, the Plaintiff entered into a loan agreement with C to lend KRW 620,000,000. To secure this, the Plaintiff’s registration of ownership was completed on June 9, 2016 and September 28, 2016 with respect to the real estate listed in paragraph (3) of the attached Table Nos. 1 and paragraph (2) of the attached Table Nos. 3 (hereinafter “instant land”) owned by C (hereinafter “instant building”).

The establishment registration of a neighboring mortgage with maximum debt amount of KRW 756,00,000 is completed.

B. On November 13, 2017, the Plaintiff filed an application for a voluntary auction of real estate with D in this Court as to the instant land and building, and the registration of the entry was completed on the same day following the decision to commence auction as of November 16, 2017 of the said court.

(hereinafter “instant auction”). C.

On March 27, 2018, the Defendant submitted a lien registration statement stating that the lien has been filed with respect to the instant land and building cost of KRW 317,352,990 as the secured claim, at the auction procedure of this case.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 3 (including virtual numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply) and the purport of whole pleadings

2. Summary of the parties' arguments

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion that ① the contract for construction work submitted by the Defendant when reporting the right of retention was unilaterally changed to the Defendant without the consent of C, and the Defendant did not take any legal measures to recover the construction cost against C, and there is no claim for the payment of the construction cost. ② The Defendant did not possess the instant land and building, ③ the Defendant prepared and submitted a written statement of waiver of the right of retention to the Plaintiff, thereby having expressed his intent to waive the right of retention. Accordingly, there is no Defendant’s right of retention on the instant land and

B. The defendant alleged that the construction work of the building of this case is newly constructed.