The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

Litigation costs shall be borne by the plaintiff.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is a company that has undertaken the new construction of a multi-household building in Eunpyeong-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, and has occupied the real estate listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant building”) based on the lien that covers the claim for construction cost against D (hereinafter “D”) as a security obligation.

B. The Defendant completed the registration of transfer of ownership of the instant building on January 21, 2011, and was a joint occupant of the Plaintiff and the instant building.

On November 17, 2011, the Seoul Western District Court 2011 Ghana 72786 filed a lawsuit for the delivery of a building against E.

On November 15, 2013, the above court rendered a judgment that "the plaintiff received 600 million won from D, and the plaintiff and E deliver the building of this case to the defendant (hereinafter referred to as "the remaining parts omitted)". The judgment became final and conclusive around that time.

(c)

The Defendant is not entitled to the execution clause because the obligation to pay KRW 600 million to the Plaintiff is not fulfilled. On May 28, 2015, the Plaintiff transferred to F all the rights, such as the claim for construction price of KRW 600 million against D and the right of retention based thereon, and F was granted the execution clause from the Seoul Western District Court on June 14, 2016 in order to enforce compulsory execution against F on the ground that F was fully paid for the said construction price by D.

(d)

Then, around August 5, 2016, the Defendant was granted by the Seoul Western District Court a successor enforcement sentence (hereinafter “instant succession enforcement sentence”) to the Plaintiff as the possessor of the instant building at the time of compulsory execution against the Plaintiff.

E. In order to seek non-permission of compulsory execution against the instant succession execution text, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit of objection against the grant of the execution clause (hereinafter “instant execution clause”) with Seoul Western District Court 2016Ga 31919, Seoul Western District Court (hereinafter “instant execution clause”). At the same time, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit of objection against the grant of the execution clause as Seoul Western District Court 2016Kao281.