1. It is confirmed that the Defendants’ lien does not exist with respect to each real estate listed in the separate sheet.

2...

1. Basic facts

A. C owns 2/3 shares of each of the real estate listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant real estate”), and D owns 1/3 shares, respectively. The Plaintiff is a mortgagee who completed the registration of creation of a neighboring mortgage with C as the debtor, and the maximum debt amount of the instant real estate is KRW 3,640,00,000, and the debtor is a mortgagee who completed the registration of creation of a neighboring mortgage

B. The Plaintiff filed an application for the voluntary auction of the instant real estate with the Incheon District Court E (hereinafter “instant voluntary auction procedure”). On January 13, 2015, the said court rendered a decision to voluntarily commence the auction. On the same day, the registration of the decision to voluntarily commence the auction of the instant real estate was completed (hereinafter “registration of the decision to commence the auction”). The Defendants reported the lien in the instant voluntary auction procedure around August 2016.

C. On January 7, 2015 and 23, 2015, F conducted an investigation into the present status and possession relation of the instant real estate in the instant voluntary auction procedure (hereinafter “instant investigation”). The instant real estate was investigated into the possession of G, G’s Ha and G’s H, and G.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 8, purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. In order to establish a lien on the instant real estate against the Defendants, the Defendants must possess the instant real estate in order to establish the lien on the instant real estate. The Defendants do not occupy the instant real estate.

B) Although Defendant A asserts that G possessing the instant real estate and the instant real estate jointly operate penture, G entered into a lease agreement with C around June 30, 2014 with respect to the instant real estate and entered into a special agreement to exclude Defendant A from exercising the right of retention. As such, Defendant A’s assertion that Defendant A is engaged in the same business with G does not have a right of retention. (ii) Defendant A’s assertion is penture with G.