1. It is confirmed that the defendant's lien does not exist as to each real estate listed in the separate sheet.

2...

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff was rendered a final and conclusive judgment in the loan claim lawsuit No. 2012Gahap1250, Seoul Eastern District Court, which filed against C (hereinafter “Nonindicted Company”), and filed an application for compulsory auction (hereinafter “instant compulsory auction”) with the Chuncheon District Court Young-gu Branch D with respect to each real estate listed in the separate sheet owned by Nonparty Company (hereinafter “each real estate of this case”) based on the original copy of the said final and conclusive judgment.

B. On March 11, 2014, the Youngcheon District Court rendered a decision to commence compulsory auction on each of the instant real estate, and on March 11, 2014, the entry registration was completed.

C. On September 19, 2014, the Defendant reported the right of retention to the Nonparty Company regarding each of the instant real property on September 19, 2014, that the sum of the soil construction cost, landscaping stone stockpiling construction cost, and the cost of excavation cutting equipment is KRW 110 million.

[Reasons for Recognition] Each entry of Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 4

2. In a lawsuit of passive confirmation as to the cause of the claim, if the plaintiff asserted to deny the fact that the cause of the claim occurred by specifying the first claim in advance, the defendant, the right holder, is liable to assert and prove the fact that the right holder is the requirement of the right relationship. Thus, in the instant case, the defendant, who claimed as the lien holder, must prove the existence and relation of the secured claim as the fact that the lien occurred and the possession

However, the data submitted by the defendant alone cannot be recognized that the defendant has a claim against the non-party company, such as earth and sand construction costs, landscaping stone stockpiling construction costs, and so on, or possession of each of the real estate of this case. Thus, there is no lien on each of the real estate of this case by the defendant.

I would like to say.

On March 26, 2015, the Defendant agreed to receive the representative E of the non-party company and the unpaid construction cost, and agreed to the procedure for compulsory auction of this case.