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. C (hereinafter “C”) established the right to collateral security (hereinafter “each of the instant real estates”) on each of the real estates listed in the separate sheet owned by D (hereinafter “each of the instant real estates”) in order to secure the claim against D (hereinafter “D”). On September 19, 2018, C filed an application for voluntary auction on each of the instant real estates and received a decision to commence voluntary auction as the Seo-gu District Court Seo Branch Branch E (hereinafter “the instant case”).

B. Thereafter, on November 9, 2018, C transferred the secured debt of each of the instant mortgage and each of the instant mortgage to F Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “F”), and F on November 29, 2018, to the Plaintiff on November 29, 2018.

C. On the other hand, in the instant case on December 6, 2018, the Defendant reported the lien with respect to each of the instant real estate as the secured claim, and the current status survey report on the instant related case (hereinafter “instant report”) stated that the instant real estate is possessed by D, G, H (hereinafter “H”) etc.

[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, each entry in Gap evidence 1 through 6 (including each number), and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. In a passive confirmation lawsuit 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 obligee, bears the burden of proving the fact that the legal relationship exists. Therefore, in a lawsuit seeking confirmation of non-existence of the right of retention, the Defendant must prove

(See Supreme Court Decision 2013Da99409 Decided March 10, 2016). In light of the foregoing legal doctrine, the instant report is indicated as possessing the real estate of this case D, G, H, etc., and each of the instant real estate of this case.