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 November 8, 2016, the Plaintiff, as a mortgagee of each real estate listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant real estate”), applied for a voluntary auction on the instant real estate on November 8, 2016, and received a voluntary decision to commence auction on November 8, 2016. On the same day, the Plaintiff registered the entry of the decision to commence voluntary auction on the instant real estate.

B. On November 15, 2016, Defendant A reported the right of retention on the ground that he/she was awarded a contract for interior works from Jung-dong Hot Spring Lease Co., Ltd., but failed to receive the construction cost of KRW 453,00,000.

C. On November 30, 2016, Defendant B reported a lien on the ground that Defendant B was awarded a contract for the instant real estate renovation and repair work, which was the actual owner of the instant real estate, but did not receive the construction cost of KRW 132,00,000.

On January 3, 2017, Defendant C was awarded a contract with E for the content and distribution of the instant real estate, but did not receive the construction cost of KRW 38,00,000.

E. In a survey on the status quo conducted during the voluntary auction procedure with respect to the instant real estate, Defendant C occupies 204 and Defendant A occupies 304, and otherwise, the lessee occupies.

[Reasons for Recognition] Defendant A, B: Each entry in Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 6 (including those with a serial number), as a whole, Defendant C: deemed as confession

2. Determination

A. In a lawsuit seeking confirmation of the existence of a right of retention against Defendant A, the person who claims the right of retention must assert and prove the fact of the requirements for its establishment and existence (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2013Da84971, Jan. 29, 2015). The materials submitted by Defendant A alone are insufficient to recognize that Defendant A incurred a claim for construction price by executing construction works on the instant real estate before the commencement of the decision of voluntary commencement of auction, and there is no other evidence to prove otherwise.

B. Claim against Defendant B