A. The Plaintiff, as the owner of the real estate listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant real estate”), had 1 South and North Korea c, 2 women (Defendant), 3 women D, 4 women E, 5 women F, 6 women G, and 1 South and North H on May 12, 2017.

B. On February 11, 2014, the Plaintiff’s two girls and four girls as to the instant real estate, E completed the registration of creation of a mortgage of KRW 80,000,000 around the maximum debt amount, and E cancelled on July 11, 2017.

C. On August 30, 2017, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the Defendant for cancellation of the right to collateral security (hereinafter referred to as “transfer lawsuit”) under this court’s 2017da123154, but withdrawn the lawsuit on September 12, 2017, and again filed the instant lawsuit, which is the aforementioned content, on January 23, 2018.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 2, 3-1, 2, Eul evidence 3-1, 2, 7, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination on this safety defense

A. The Defendant’s assertion is unlawful as it goes against the agreement on the institution of a lawsuit, since the Plaintiff’s legal representative was appointed differently from the Plaintiff’s actual intent, and thus, the instant lawsuit did not grant legitimate power of attorney, and the Plaintiff did not institute a new lawsuit while withdrawing the previous lawsuit.

B. In light of the existence of the power of attorney, and the capacity of a doctor means the mental ability or intelligence that can reasonably be determined based on the meaning or outcome of his act based on normal perception and towing power. The effect of the procedural acts conducted by a person without mental capacity should be determined for each individual procedural act by taking into account various circumstances, such as the degree of his/her mental capacity, the nature and effect of the pertinent procedural acts, etc. (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2001Da10113, Oct. 11, 2002), evidence No. 1, 5, and evidence No. 6-2.