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. Each real estate listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “each of the instant real estate”) is owned by A, and the Plaintiff is a mortgagee who has completed the establishment registration of neighboring mortgage regarding each of the instant real estate.

B. On February 8, 2018, the Plaintiff filed an application for voluntary auction with respect to each of the instant real estate, and voluntarily decided to commence auction on February 8, 2018

C. On April 23, 2018, the Defendant filed a lien report with respect to each of the instant real estate on April 23, 2018, alleging that the former owner of each of the instant real estate had a claim for construction cost.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 7, and purport of the whole pleadings

2. In a passive confirmation lawsuit, if the Plaintiff alleged that the cause of the obligation occurred by specifying the Plaintiff’s claim first, the Defendant, the obligee, bears the responsibility to assert and prove the facts constituting the elements of legal relationship. As such, in a lawsuit seeking confirmation of non-existence of a right of retention, the Defendant should assert and prove the existence of the subject matter of a right of retention and the related claim.

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2013Da99409, Mar. 10, 2016). Therefore, the Defendant bears the burden of proving the existence of a claim related to each of the instant real estate and the instant real estate, but the Defendant did not submit any material.

Therefore, even though there is no defendant's right of retention on each real estate of this case, the plaintiff has a benefit to seek confirmation.

3. In conclusion, the plaintiff's claim is reasonable, and it is so decided as per Disposition.