1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

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

1. The plaintiff's assertion

A. The Plaintiff received a decision to grant a sale permission with the highest bidder of 860 square meters of the instant building and its site in the auction procedure (C) at the Jung-gu District Court’s Voluntary Auction procedure (C), and paid the price, and completed the registration of ownership transfer on August 25, 2014.

B. However, the Defendant asserted that it had a lien on the instant building as secured claim because it failed to receive the construction cost from E, the registration of preservation of ownership of the instant building was completed, and that it had a lien on the instant building.

C. However, in the case where the Defendant filed a complaint against E, the Defendant rendered a non-suspected disposition on the grounds that the Defendant received the payment of the construction cost in full, and thus, the Defendant’s right of retention on the instant building did not constitute a secured obligation.

Therefore, the defendant's existence of a lien on the building of this case is confirmed.

2. Determination on the legitimacy of a lawsuit

A. A lawsuit seeking confirmation is recognized where obtaining a judgment of confirmation is the most effective and appropriate means to eliminate the Plaintiff’s legal status’s anxiety and risk. In a case where the Defendant occupies real estate owned by the Plaintiff, seeking delivery is a direct means to eliminate the Plaintiff’s ownership anxiety and risk in a valid and appropriate manner. Thus, seeking confirmation of the absence of a lien on the relevant real estate against the Defendant is unlawful as there is no benefit of confirmation.

(See Supreme Court Decision 2010Da84932 Decided April 10, 2014). B.

In accordance with the above legal principles, the Plaintiff’s seeking the delivery of the instant building against the Defendant becomes a direct means to eliminate the Plaintiff’s anxiety and danger about the ownership of the instant building and to seek confirmation of the non-existence of a lien against the Defendant, even if such means can be taken, is separately sought against the Defendant.