1. It is confirmed that the defendant's lien on real estate listed in the attached list does not exist.

2. This Court.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff was determined as the highest bidder by responding to KRW 318,788,00 from the 12-sale date ( January 11, 2016) of the 12-sale period for the real estate auction case for D real estate auction (hereinafter “instant building”) with respect to the real estate listed in the separate sheet, the registration of ownership preservation of which was completed in C’s name, and completed the registration of ownership transfer on the instant building in the name of the Plaintiff on May 16, 2016.

B. The Defendant, as a company that entered into a contract with E and carried out the construction of the instant building, filed an application for payment order with the Gwangju District Court Decision 2012Hu748, 1,337,066,709, and damages for delay thereof, against E and its joint guarantor C, as the Defendant failed to receive the construction cost from E, and thus filed an application for payment order with the Gwangju District Court Naju District Court Decision 2012Hu748, 1,37,06,709, and the payment order was issued on December 3, 2012

C. The defendant is the above A.

On May 23, 2014, at the auction procedure stated in paragraph (1), the lien on the instant building was reported by setting C’s claim against the above payment order as the preserved bond.

On October 4, 2016, the Defendant applied for a voluntary auction of the instant building owned by the Plaintiff and received a decision to commence auction on October 24, 2016, based on the above-reported lien.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 2, Eul evidence 1, 2, Eul evidence 3-1, 2-2, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. The defendant filed a formal declaration of lien in the case of a compulsory auction by official auction against the real estate D branch of Gwangju District Court, Gwangju District Court, and did not actually possess the building of this case, and thus did not acquire the lien.

Even if the defendant's lien on the building of this case existed in the past, the plaintiff currently occupies the building of this case, and the defendant occupies the building of this case.