근저당권말소
1. The Defendant-Counterclaim Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) shall be the Jeonju District Court with respect to the area of 281 square meters of the entire city forest C in Jeonsan-gu, Jeonju-si.
A principal lawsuit and a counterclaim shall be deemed to be combined.
1. Basic facts
A. The auditor E of the D Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as the "D") lent 400 million won to D for the construction of 2 commercial buildings in the market (hereinafter referred to as the "loan Claim of this case") and collected each of the loan certificates issued on January 29, 1997 under the name of D (joint and several surety: F, the president of D, the vice president of D (D), the interest: 2% per month, and the due date: August 31, 1997) and F and the joint name of the plaintiff on January 29, 197 (40 million won: the due date: August 31, 1997).
B. On July 18, 1997, E received a provisional attachment order with respect to the instant real estate F and G’s real estate in order to preserve the instant loan claims by Jeonju District Court 97Kadan53466.
In addition, in order to secure the loan claim of this case, E was created by the Jeonju District Court No. 78862, August 29, 1997, with respect to the real estate of this case, as the obligor, the mortgagee E, and the maximum debt amount of KRW 100 million (hereinafter “mortgage”).
C. On January 17, 2006, E died, and the Defendant, who is E, completed the registration of transfer of the instant right to collateral security on October 7, 2013 due to inheritance by consultation and division on January 17, 2006.
[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 2, Eul evidence 1, 2, and 6 (including provisional numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply), the purport of the whole pleadings
2. The parties' assertion
A. As the Plaintiff’s loan claim of this case expired after five years of extinctive prescription period under the Commercial Act or ten years of extinctive prescription period under the Civil Act from March 15, 2003, the right to collateral security of this case must be cancelled.
Furthermore, on or before February 17, 1998, the Plaintiff paid 400 million won to the Defendant who was given a loan from the mutual savings and finance company prior to the Plaintiff’s wife in the name of H in the presence of G at the mutual savings and finance office.