The judgment below is reversed, and the case is remanded to the Gwangju High Court.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. The requirements for establishment of a lien under Article 320 of the Civil Act and possession, which is the requirements for existence of a lien, refers to an objective relationship that appears to be a factual control of the person in terms of social norms. At this time, a factual control is not necessarily limited to physical and practical control over an object, but should be judged in conformity with the concept of society by taking into account the time and spatial relationship with the object and the principal right relationship with the object, the possibility of exclusion from other people's control, etc. However, in order to have an objective relationship, at least the other person's interference should

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 73Da923, Jul. 16, 1974; 2002Da34543, Jul. 25, 2003; 2007Ma1602, Mar. 27, 2008). In addition, an assistant in possession refers to a person who actually controls an object under another’s instruction through a relationship such as household affairs, business and other similar relations (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 73Da923, Jul. 16, 1974; 2002Da34543, Jul. 25, 2003; 2007Ma1602, Mar. 27, 2008). The same shall not apply where the occupation of an assistant in possession is deemed to assist the possession of an object in light of social norms as a relationship to which the other is ordered to comply (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 201

In addition, any person who acquired a lien only after the registration of the decision on commencement of auction was made on a certain real estate, may not claim his/her lien in the auction procedure (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 2010Da84932, Apr. 10, 2014; 2005Da22688, Aug. 19, 2005). In a lawsuit seeking confirmation of existence of a lien, the person who claimed the lien should assert and prove the fact of the requirements for its establishment and existence.

(See Supreme Court Decision 97Da45259 delivered on March 13, 1998, etc.). 2. The judgment of the court below is made on March 13, 1998.