1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Determination on the cause of the claim

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion 1) The Plaintiff’s real estate indicated in the attached Form (hereinafter “instant building”) by December 10, 201.

(2) The Plaintiff owned the instant building from February 10, 201 to February 10, 2015 and temporarily lost possession of the instant building due to the Defendant’s deprivation of occupation on the ground that the said possession was caused by the Defendant’s tort, and thus, the Plaintiff’s lien exists with respect to the instant building at the rate of 15.5% per annum from February 10, 2012 to the date of full payment. The Defendant is the owner of the instant building. The Plaintiff: (a) occupied the instant building from February 10, 2011 to February 10, 2015; and (b) temporarily lost possession of the instant building; (c) the Plaintiff’s loss of possession was caused by the Defendant’s tort; and (d) the Plaintiff’s lien exists with respect to the instant building as the secured claim for the construction payment; and (e) the Plaintiff’s right to retention is to seek confirmation against the Defendant.

B. Determination 1) The right of retention is naturally extinguished due to the loss of possession (Article 328 of the Civil Act). Even according to the Plaintiff’s assertion, the Plaintiff already lost possession of the building of this case on February 10, 2015. Thus, the Plaintiff cannot be deemed to have any right of retention for the building of this case, and there is no claim against the Defendant for the prohibition of interference with the possession on the premise of the Plaintiff’s possession as to the building of this case. This is more so in that it is difficult to deem that the Plaintiff occupied the building of this case by February 10, 2015, as seen below 2).

2. First of all, according to the evidence Nos. 9 and 17, C, around August 3, 2012, is obligated for the Plaintiff to pay KRW 1 billion to the Plaintiff who paid the construction cost of KRW 1 billion with respect to the instant building. The Plaintiff occupied the instant building and owned the lien.