The costs of appeal are assessed against the Plaintiff.

1. Examining the reasoning of the lower judgment regarding the Plaintiff’s grounds of appeal Nos. 1 through 3 in light of the records, the lower court, based on its stated reasoning, held that the Defendants purchased the instant real estate through an auction procedure to enforce the instant right to collateral security, and acquired the ownership thereof constitutes a breach

We agree with the decision that it is difficult to deem that the plaintiff suffered a certain loss due to this, and there is no error of law such as misunderstanding of legal principles as alleged in the grounds of appeal.

2. Examining the reasoning of the lower judgment in light of the records as to the Plaintiff’s ground of appeal No. 4, the lower court is just and acceptable to have rejected the Plaintiff’s assertion that the Defendants should return KRW 272,172,714, out of the dividends received from the auction procedure for exercising the right to collateral security in this case, as alleged in the grounds of appeal. In so doing, the lower

3. Therefore, the appeal is dismissed, and the costs of appeal are assessed against the losing party. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.