beta
Text
1. It is confirmed that the defendant's lien does not exist as to each real estate listed in the separate sheet.
2...
Reasons
1. On February 25, 2010, the Plaintiff acquired the ownership of the instant real estate on the gist of the party’s assertion. The Plaintiff asserted as the lien holder of the said real estate and sought a return of unjust enrichment calculated by the ratio of KRW 1,00,000 per month from the possession of the said real estate to the Defendant who occupied the said real estate, by verifying the absence of a lien on the said real estate.
2. On the judgment on the main defense of this case, the defendant asserted that the lawsuit of this case is unlawful because the plaintiff is not the real owner of the real estate of this case, and the standing to sue is defective.
However, in the litigation of performance, the plaintiff has standing to sue, so even if the plaintiff is not the real owner of the real estate of this case, the standing to sue of this case is not denied, and the defendant's defense is without merit.
3. Determination as to the claim for confirmation of existence of lien
A. In a lawsuit for passive confirmation, if the plaintiff asserts that the plaintiff's claim is denied by specifying the cause of the right first, the defendant, the right holder, etc. is liable to assert and prove the fact of the requirement of legal relationship (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 97Da45259, Mar. 13, 1998). In this case, even in this case, the defendant, the right holder, should prove the existence of the secured claim concerning the building of this case and the fact of possession thereof.
B. The defendant asserts that C, the former owner of the instant real estate, has monetary claims of KRW 569,00,000 in total as follows.
1) Since the Defendant concluded a reclamation contract with C on July 4, 2007 and completed the above construction work, the Defendant lent KRW 15,000,000 to C around July 4, 2007, the Defendant lent KRW 15,000,000 to C around July 4, 2007. Of them, the Defendant lent KRW 3,00,000,000, excluding KRW 6,000,000,000, excluding KRW 6,000,000, which was repaid by C, to the Defendant on September 22, 2008.