근저당권말소
1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Purport of claim and appeal
The first instance court.
1. The reasons why the court should explain this part of the facts of recognition are as stated in Paragraph 1 of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act, since the second instance court's "10 million won" following the second instance court's "10 million won," and the second instance's "19.19, 30 million won, 199," and the second instance's "12.1.20, 1999" is the same as the part of Paragraph 1 of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act, except for adding "the security of the instant loan claim."
2. The assertion and judgment
A. The Plaintiff asserted that the Defendant’s claim for the instant loan against B was completely and completely extinguished after the lapse of ten years from January 20, 1999 when the registration of the instant right to collateral security was completed, and thus, the instant registration should be cancelled. Accordingly, the Defendant asserts that the statute of limitations has been interrupted prior to the instant loan claim.
B. Determination 1) A creditor, who had been registered prior to the registration of the first decision on commencing auction and has become extinct due to sale, can naturally participate in distribution even if he/she did not demand a distribution in the auction procedure commenced upon request by another creditor. If such creditor exercised his/her right by reporting the existence of a claim, its cause and amount to a court, the report on the claim is equivalent to seizure under Article 168 subparag. 2 of the Civil Act, and the interruption of extinctive prescription on the reported claim has an effect of suspending the extinctive prescription on the reported claim. In cases where the auction procedure was revoked pursuant to Article 102(2) of the Civil Execution Act, the interruption of the extinctive prescription is not extinguished (see Supreme Court Decision 2014Da228778, Feb. 26, 2015). According to the aforementioned evidence, the statement in the evidence, evidence No. 4 and evidence No. 6 as seen earlier, and the overall purport of pleadings and arguments, the period of repayment of the loan of this case on January 19, 19999.