On December 15, 2008, D Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “D”) entered into a credit guarantee agreement and D Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “D”) with a loan of KRW 100 million from the Industrial Bank of Korea. In relation to the above loan, the Plaintiff entered into a credit guarantee agreement with a guarantee amount of KRW 95 million.

D took out a loan of KRW 38 million from E Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “E”), on February 5, 2016, and the Plaintiff entered into a credit guarantee agreement with the amount guaranteed as KRW 26.6 million with respect to the said loan.

C, the representative director of D, under the above credit guarantee agreement, has jointly and severally guaranteed the debt to be borne by D to the plaintiff.

The occurrence of a credit guarantee accident and the Plaintiff’s subrogation D lost the benefit of time due to the Industrial Bank of Korea’s failure to pay the principal and interest of each loan to the Bank and E, and the Industrial Bank of Korea notified the Plaintiff of the occurrence of the guarantee accident on July 5, 2016, and E, July 7, 2016.

The Plaintiff paid 68,467,231 won to the Industrial Bank of Korea on August 9, 2016, and 26,744,293 won to E on March 13, 2017, respectively, in accordance with the aforementioned credit guarantee agreement.

On June 10, 2016, C concluded a mortgage agreement with the Defendant on June 10, 2016 with regard to the real estate listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant apartment”) with regard to which the Defendant, the debtor C, and the maximum debt amount are KRW 144 million (hereinafter “the instant mortgage agreement”). On June 10, 2016, C concluded a mortgage agreement with the Seoul Central District Court (11496, Jun. 10, 2016).

At the time of entering into the instant collective security contract, prior priority was established on the apartment of the instant apartment, F Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “F”) and the maximum debt amount of KRW 322,80,000,000.

On October 21, 2016, upon the application of the FF for the auction of the apartment of this case and the Plaintiff’s voluntary auction of the provisional attachment, the apartment of this case is subject to the Seoul Central District Court B with regard to the real estate auction procedure.