1. The plaintiff (Counterclaim defendant)'s main claim is dismissed.

2. The Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) shall be attached to the attached Form 213.9m2, Nam-gu, Incheon.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On April 20, 2012, D completed the registration of the establishment of a neighboring mortgage-backed credit union, debtor D, and maximum debt amount of 273,000,000 square meters with respect to the land of this case (hereinafter “instant land”).

B. On November 12, 2012, the Plaintiff was awarded a contract on April 30, 2013 on the date of completion of construction works, which newly built a building not registered under paragraph (2) of the order (hereinafter “instant building”) on the ground of the instant land, as the construction cost of KRW 954,80,000, and the date of commencement of construction works, as of November 19, 2012.

C. On March 3, 2015, the Defendant completed the registration of ownership transfer by winning the instant land at a successful bid.

The Plaintiff occupies the instant building by exercising a lien to secure the claim for the construction cost of the instant building against D.

[Grounds for recognition] Evidence No. 5, Evidence No. 8-1, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The Plaintiff’s judgment on the claim of the principal claim is to attract the building of this case as the construction price claim for the building of this case, and the right of retention for the land of this case is also sought to confirm, and thus, the right of retention is recognized only for the claim arising with respect to the goods. The Plaintiff’s claim for the construction price of this case is not a claim for the building of this case and a claim for the land of this case. Thus, the Plaintiff’s claim for the right

(A) Although interpreting the Plaintiff’s claim as seeking confirmation of lien on the instant building, the Plaintiff cannot set up against the Defendant, the owner of the instant land, the right of retention on the instant building, as seen in Section 3.A., and therefore, only the existence of the right of retention on the instant building cannot be deemed as the most effective means to eliminate the Plaintiff’s rights or legal status, and there is no interest in such confirmation).

3. Judgment on the counterclaim

(a)the existence of a building;