1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

1. The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, which cited the case, is as follows, is that the court of first instance cites a clause (3.20 to 4.1 of the judgment of the court of first instance) among the '3.3.1 of the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance' (3.20 to 11 of the judgment of the court of first instance) as follows, and therefore, it is cite

(B) In full view of the following facts or circumstances, which are acknowledged by the health stand in light of the aforementioned legal principles, the evidence mentioned above and the purport of Gap evidence as well as Gap evidence Nos. 4, 6, and 14 (including branch numbers), the evidence alone submitted by the defendant is insufficient to acknowledge that the defendant's possession of each of the real estate of this case has been commenced before the registration of the decision to commence the auction of this case has been completed, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge that there is no right to retention of the defendant. Therefore, it is reasonable to deem that there is no other evidence to acknowledge that the defendant's right to retention does not exist. (1) In order to recognize the defendant's right to retention in this case, it is reasonable to prove that the defendant had commenced possession prior to the registration of the decision to commence the auction of this case completed on August 6, 2018. However, the execution officer in the voluntary auction procedure of this case has commenced three times prior to the registration of the decision to commence the auction of this case.

8.28.28.

9.7.) In the column for the possession of the report on the investigation of the current status of real estate prepared after visiting and investigating the site, even though the enforcement officer confirmed all the existence of the building outside the presented place, the Defendant’s possession of “the owner F or lessee E Co., Ltd.,” and there is no indication on the Defendant’s possession or lien claim. ② From November 2, 2018 to June 25, 2019, the Plaintiff visited each of the instant real estate at several times and taken pictures (as evidence A to evidence 6 through 13, there is no trace of the Defendant’s possession at that time, and there was no record on the Defendant’s possession at that time, and there was no record on January 4, 2019.