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

A. On April 23, 2014, the Plaintiff (contractor) concluded a construction contract with the Defendant (contractor) for the construction work of multi-family house C on the ground of Namyang-si and the completion date of the relevant construction work (hereinafter “instant construction contract”), which is KRW 210,000,000 and July 30, 2014.

B. The sum of the money that the Defendant remitted to the Plaintiff between April 24, 2014 and June 15, 2015 is KRW 369,00,000.

C. On February 2, 2015, on the instant real estate owned by the Plaintiff on January 20, 2015, the establishment registration of the instant neighboring mortgage was completed by the Plaintiff, the mortgagee, the Defendant, and the maximum debt amount of KRW 100,000 on the ground of the contract for establishing the contract on January 20, 2015, and upon the Defendant’s request, the decision to commence voluntary auction was rendered to the Seoul Eastern District Court E on May 20, 2015.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2 and Eul evidence Nos. 1, 3-4 and 4, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The plaintiff's assertion and judgment

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion does not establish the registration of the instant right to collateral security while actually borrowing money from the Defendant. However, since the Defendant requested that “I wish to pay additional construction cost under the instant construction contract, I would like to present a loan certificate to F, who is the Defendant’s wife, so I would like to prepare a loan certificate and request the establishment of the instant registration of collateral security,” the Plaintiff merely created the instant registration of collateral security. Therefore, there is no collateral obligation secured by the registration of collateral security.

B. 1) In the event that a registration of establishment of a neighboring mortgage has been completed, the registration is presumed to have been lawful and to have publicly announced the state of true rights. Therefore, the party who asserts that the registration was unlawful is responsible to prove the opposing fact that it may reverse the presumption power (see Supreme Court Decisions 2000Da72763, Apr. 10, 201; 92Da30047, Oct. 27, 1992). Meanwhile, the secured claim of the right to collateral security is established at the time of the establishment of the right to collateral security.