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

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 3 (including additional number), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The Plaintiff’s assertion C concluded a mortgage contract on behalf of the Plaintiff on behalf of the Plaintiff, and completed the registration of establishment of a mortgage by forging documents related to registration.

Therefore, the registration of the establishment of a neighboring mortgage in the name of the defendant is null and void since it was completed without due cause or procedure. Thus, the defendant is obligated to implement the procedure for cancellation of the registration of the establishment of a neighboring mortgage.

3. Where the establishment registration of a mortgage was completed, the registration is presumed to have been lawful and to have disclosed the state of true right. Therefore, the party alleged as unlawful in the registration is responsible to prove the opposing fact sufficient to reverse such presumption.

(See Supreme Court Decision 200Da72763 Decided April 10, 201, etc.). In addition, where a registration is made by an act involving a third party, not by a direct act of disposal of the former registered titleholder, but by an act involving a third party, where the former registered titleholder claims that the former registered titleholder has been granted the right of representation from the former registered titleholder, the registration of the former registered titleholder shall be presumed to have been duly made. Thus, the former registered titleholder seeking the cancellation of the registration on the ground that the above registration is null and void, that is, the former registered titleholder did not have the authority to act on behalf of

(b).