1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

1. The reasons why the court should explain this part of the basic facts are the same as the part of the "1. Basic Facts" among the reasons for the judgment of the court of first instance. Thus, they are cited by the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. The parties' assertion

A. Plaintiff 1) The Defendant is merely a nominal business entity to obtain a license loan fee of KRW 81,00,000 for the instant construction project, and the construction project for creating a factory site for the instant land in fact (hereinafter “instant construction project”).

There is no proceeding. Ultimately, the Defendant is a corporation A (hereinafter “A”).

(2) Since there is no claim for the construction cost as to the instant claim, there is no secured claim under a lien. (2) Even if the instant claim for the construction cost exists, the statute of limitations for the instant claim is three years, and the instant claim for the construction cost occurred before or after February 2014, where a financial resources industry development company (hereinafter “financial resources industry”) did not undertake the construction work, and the statute of limitations has expired after the lapse of three years thereafter.

3) Furthermore, the Defendant suspended the instant construction before around February 2013, and did not proceed with the said construction. However, around February 2014, the financial resources industry was contracted with the Plaintiff to perform additional construction works. Ultimately, the Defendant lost possession of the instant land after February 2, 2014, when the financial resources industry was performing additional construction works. Ultimately, the Defendant merely lost possession of the instant land without the agreement with A, the owner as the former contractor, constitutes an illegal possession without title, and thus no lien is established. 4) Even if the lien was established, the Defendant renounced the right of retention on the instant land by declaring its intent through a written declaration of intent to exclude the instant lien.

In addition, the plaintiff trusted the defendant's intent to waive the above lien and trusted it to B (the representative director A at the time).