1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

1. The reasoning for the court’s explanation in this part is that “the Defendant’s claim for construction price, etc.” in Section 10 of Section 3 of the judgment of the first instance is “the Plaintiff’s claim for construction price, etc.,” and that Section 10 of Section 4 is “the Plaintiff’s claim for construction price, etc.,” respectively, and that Section 2 and Section 3 is added to Section 17 of Section 4, and that Section 4 is the same as the corresponding part of the judgment of the first instance except for adding each of the following to the corresponding parts, and thus, it is cited as it is in accordance with the main sentence of

[Supplementary Parts] On March 3, 2011, Q submitted a letter of waiver of lien to AE, etc., “I, even if I do not receive any goods and services provided by I in connection with the construction of the instant construction site from the project implementer and the project implementer, I waive any exercise of the right of retention arising in connection with the instant construction project, do not exercise any and all real rights and obligations, which are contrary thereto, and confirm that I will explain the site without any objection as requested by you.”

Q filed a lawsuit against AE corporation and I, etc., as Daegu District Court 2013Gahap1987, seeking confirmation of existence of a lien for 6th AF, 7th H, and 8th AG of the instant building. However, the said court dismissed Q’s claim on July 11, 2013 on the ground that Q renounced renounced a lien, and Q Q appealed appealed, but the petition of appeal was dismissed, and the said judgment became final and conclusive.

The Defendant filed a claim against the Plaintiff and Q, etc. for delivery of part of the sixth floor of the instant building [Tgu District Court Decision 2017Gahap206186, 2018Gahap201836 (Counterclaim)]. As to the Defendant’s claim on the principal lawsuit, the above court renounced Q from the 8th floor of the instant building, and it is difficult to view Q as the Plaintiff’s occupation assistant. Accordingly, the Plaintiff’s occupation portion was extinguished by the Defendant’s claim for extinguishment of the right of retention.