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

A. On August 3, 2006, the Plaintiff completed the registration of the establishment of a neighboring mortgage (hereinafter “registration of the establishment of a neighboring land of this case”) with respect to the Defendant of the amount of 992 square meters (hereinafter “instant real estate”) owned by the Defendant, setting the obligor C, the mortgagee, the Defendant, and the maximum debt amount of KRW 150 million as KRW 150,000,000.

B. On June 22, 2017, the auction procedure was commenced regarding the instant real estate. On February 26, 2018, E awarded a successful bid for the instant real estate in the auction procedure and completed the registration of ownership transfer. The registration of establishment of the instant neighboring real estate was cancelled on March 30, 2018.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, entry of Gap evidence 1, purport of whole pleadings

2. The Plaintiff’s assertion C’s obligation to borrow the principal and interest of KRW 150 million based on the loan certificate as of July 29, 2006, which was drawn up by the Defendant, did not exist due to repayment or lapse of prescription. Therefore, since the secured claim of the instant mortgage establishment registration was extinguished, the registration of the establishment of the instant neighboring mortgage should also be cancelled.

3. Determination on the legitimacy of the instant lawsuit

A. In a lawsuit seeking confirmation of the part of a claim for confirmation of the existence of a debt, the subject of confirmation requires the present right or legal relationship. Thus, barring any special circumstance, it is not recognized whether a previous right or legal relationship exists. Thus, if a lawsuit seeking confirmation of non-existence of a collateral security obligation is cancelled, it is about the past right or legal relationship and there is no benefit of confirmation (see Supreme Court Decision 2012Da17585, Aug. 23, 2013). The fact that the registration of the establishment of a collateral security right of this case was cancelled on March 30, 2018 is as seen earlier, and therefore, the part seeking confirmation of non-existence of a collateral security obligation of this case becomes no benefit of confirmation as to the existence of past right or legal relationship as the registration of the establishment of a collateral security right of this case was cancelled.

(b).