1. It is confirmed that the Defendants’ lien does not exist with respect to each real estate listed in the separate sheet.

2...

1. Basic facts

A. On August 6, 2015, the Plaintiff completed the registration of the establishment of a neighboring mortgage at KRW 507,00,000, out of the maximum debt amount on August 6, 2015, regarding the real estate listed in paragraph (1) of the attached Table No. 1 (hereinafter “instant land”) owned by Nonparty D Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Nonindicted Company”).

(The debtor of the above-mortgage was E, but the debtor was changed to the non-party company on March 15, 2016.

The Plaintiff filed an application for a voluntary auction of real estate with the Speaker District Court F with respect to the instant land based on the foregoing right to collateral security (hereinafter “instant auction procedure”) on August 31, 2016, and the registration of the voluntary auction decision was completed on September 1, 2016.

On the other hand, on the ground of the instant land, 4 warehouses listed in attached Table 2, which are unregistered buildings are installed.

C. In the instant auction procedure, on September 23, 2016, Defendant B reported each right of retention on the instant land, with the amounting to KRW 161,70,000 as the secured claim, and Defendant C reported each right of retention on the instant land, with the amounting to KRW 50,00,000 as the construction cost claim on February 1, 2017, and KRW 99,870,000 as the secured claim on February 1, 2017.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 2, 3, Gap evidence 4-1, Gap evidence 5-1, Gap evidence 6-1, Gap evidence 7, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination on the cause of the claim

A. The summary of the parties’ assertion 1) The Plaintiff asserted each lien on the instant land. However, there is no secured claim on the instant land, and the Defendants did not occupy the instant land, and thus, the Defendants’ lien on the instant land does not exist. As to this, the Defendants asserted that there is no lien on the instant land. 2) As such, the Defendants occupied the instant land by designating the claim for construction cost as the secured claim, the Defendants occupied the instant land as the secured claim, the said lien exists against the Defendants.