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

가. 중소기업은행은 주식회사 프리윅스(이하 ‘프리윅스’라 한다)에 대한 대출금채권을 담보하기 위하여 2013. 9. 10. 프리윅스와 사이에 별지 목록 기재 각 부동산(이하 ‘이 사건 각 부동산’이라 한다)에 관하여 채권최고액 1,380,000,000원, 채무자 프리웍스로 된 근저당권설정계약을 체결하고 같은 날 이 사건 각 부동산에 관하여 근저당권설정등기를 마쳤다.

나. 이후 프리웍스가 대출금을 변제하지 못하자 중소기업은행은 위 근저당권에 기하여 이 사건 각 부동산에 관하여 수원지방법원 안양지원 A로 임의경매를 신청하였고, 2014. 5. 12. 위 법원으로부터 부동산임의경매개시결정을 받아 이 사건 각 부동산에 관하여 같은 날 임의경매개시결정 기입등기가 마쳐졌다

(hereinafter the above auction procedure is referred to as “instant auction procedure”).

On June 17, 2014, the Defendant filed a lien on each of the instant real estate at the instant auction procedure, alleging that the Defendant had a claim for the construction cost against the tegrative construction due to the tegrative construction, and filed a lien report with the Defendant as a secured claim.

On the other hand, on July 16, 2014, the Plaintiff succeeded to the creditor status of the instant auction procedure by acquiring the Bank’s loan claims against the Bank’s Bank of Korea’s Franchis, and filing a report on the creditor’s change at the instant auction procedure.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 5, purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. The Defendant does not have a claim for the payment of the construction price payable by the Defendant, and since the Plaintiff did not continuously occupy each of the instant real estate since the registration of the decision on commencing auction was completed on each of the instant real estate, the Defendant’s lien is not recognized.

나. 피고 피고는 프리웍스로부터 인테리어공사를 도급받아...