1. The plaintiff's claim against the defendant is dismissed.

2. The defendant shall enter the plaintiff's successor in the annexed list.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On June 7, 2018, the Plaintiff’s successor completed the registration of ownership transfer concerning the real estate listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant real estate”) from the Plaintiff.

B. The defendant occupies the real estate of this case.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 3, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The Plaintiff’s claim determination is sought against the Defendant on the premise that the Plaintiff himself/herself is the owner of the instant real estate, but since the ownership of the instant real estate was transferred to the Plaintiff’s successor, the Plaintiff’s claim against the Defendant is without merit.

3. Determination as to the claims of the Plaintiff’s succeeding intervenor

A. According to the above, the defendant is obligated to deliver the instant real estate to the plaintiff succeeding intervenor, who is the owner of the instant real estate, unless there are special circumstances.

B. 1) As to the construction work of the instant real estate, the Defendant, as a contractor for the construction work of the instant real estate, has lent KRW 100 million to D Co., Ltd., which had concluded a construction contract between the Plaintiff and the Plaintiff, and thus, the Defendant asserts to the effect that the claim is asserted against the Plaintiff on the basis of the lien that provides the above loan claims as secured claim. 2) In light of Article 320(1) of the Civil Act, “a person who possesses another’s property or securities has the right to retain the property or securities until he/she is reimbursed if the claim arising with respect to such property or securities is due and due,” and “a claim arising with respect to such property” here includes not only the case where a claim arising from the property itself, but also the case where the legal relation or factual relations identical with the right to claim for the return of the property is arising from

(See Supreme Court Decision 2005Da16942 Decided September 7, 2007).