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

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

A. On July 1, 201, the Defendant completed the registration of the establishment of a mortgage (hereinafter referred to as the “mortgage”) with the maximum debt amount of KRW 156,000,000,000 in accordance with the Factory and Mining Foundation Mortgage Mortgage Act with respect to the land and building in the name of B (the Plaintiff’s wife), including 220.5 square meters (hereinafter referred to as the “instant stable”), the steel pipe tank 1,078 square meters in the same location, and the steel pipe 1,20,000 square meters in the same location, and the land and building in the name of B (the Plaintiff’s wife), which are installed within the instant stable, 4,00,000, 200,000 won in the attached Table, under the Factory and Mining Foundation Mortgage Act. < Amended by Presidential Decree No. 158415, Jan. 1, 201; Presidential Decree No. 17210, Oct. 10, 2001>

In the name of the company in the c warehouse and storage yard at the location of the State, the 4th class 12,500,000 12,000,000 9,000,000 2,0000,000 2,000,0000 74,000,000 24,0000 24,0000,000 24,000,000,000 9,000,000,000 22,000,000,000

B. Since then, as the Defendant did not pay interest on the above loan, on October 8, 2013, the Defendant applied for an auction of real estate rent based on the instant right to collateral security and continued the auction procedure to Gwangju District Court E. The instant machinery and equipment were sold en bloc to a third party along with other real estate owned by the object B subject to the instant right to collateral security in the said auction procedure.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 4, 6, 8 (including virtual numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply), Eul evidence Nos. 4 and 5, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The Plaintiff’s argument is that the Plaintiff owned the Plaintiff’s machines and instruments purchased from F and installed in the stable of this case, and the Plaintiff or B did not have consented to the establishment of the instant right to collateral security against the said machines and instruments, and thus, the Defendant arbitrarily put the said machines and instruments into the object of the instant right to collateral security, on the ground that the Defendant had B’s seal.