A. Defendant B: (a) on July 11, 2012, the Suwon District Court with regard to the area of 3,174 square meters of the C orchard in Sungsung-si.

(a) Indication of claims: To be as shown in the reasons for the claims;

(b) Judgment based on the recommendation of confession (Article 208 (3) 2 and Article 150 (3) of the Civil Procedure Act);

2. Claim against Defendant Republic of Korea

A. 1) The instant real estate is located on the following grounds: (a) the Plaintiff’s ignsung-si C orchard 3,174 square meters (hereinafter “instant real estate”).

As to the maximum debt amount of KRW 192,00,00, and the Plaintiff, the mortgagee, and the mortgagee D, the Suwon District Court rendered the registration of the establishment of a neighboring mortgage (hereinafter “instant collateral security”) by the Head of Suwon District Court No. 99177, Jul. 11, 2012.

(2) On June 11, 2015, the supplementary registration of the transfer of the right to collateral security was completed on June 16, 2015 with regard to the instant right to collateral security as Defendant B, the mortgagee of the right to collateral security, and the transfer of the right to collateral security as the supplementary registration of the transfer of the right to collateral security was completed on June 16, 2015.

3) On August 10, 2016, Defendant Republic of Korea seized the above-mortgaged claim against Defendant B with a national tax claim against Defendant B, which Defendant B had against the Plaintiff, and as to the instant real estate, the registration of seizure of collateral-backed claims (hereinafter “registration of seizure”) was issued on August 24, 2016 by the same registry office as the registration of seizure of collateral-backed claims (hereinafter “registration of seizure”).

Upon completion of the proceedings (the fact that there is no dispute over the grounds for recognition, entry of Gap evidence No. 1, the purport of the whole pleadings).

B. Determination 1 on the cause of a claim is a mortgage established by setting only the maximum amount of the debt to be secured and reserving the determination of an obligation in the future (Article 357(1) of the Civil Act and a security right established to secure a certain limit in a settlement term for the future. As such, there must be a legal act establishing a secured claim of the right to collateral separately from the act of establishing the right to collateral, and the burden of proof on whether there was a legal act establishing the secured claim of the right to collateral at the time of the establishment of the right to collateral.

On the other hand, a claim with collateral security is seized.