A. On October 25, 2010, the Daejeon District Court, Taean-gun, Taean-gun, Taean-gun, the deceased F (hereinafter “the deceased”) established the right to collateral security (hereinafter “instant right to collateral security”) of KRW 80,000,000 for the maximum debt amount of KRW 1,937 square meters (hereinafter “instant real property”) owned by the deceased F (hereinafter “the deceased”). < Amended by Act No. 19670, Oct. 25, 2010>

B. Moreover, on March 7, 2011, the registration of the establishment of the instant neighboring mortgage was completed for the additional registration to transfer the right to collateral security to the Defendant on March 8, 201 as the receipt of the Taean District Court Decision No. 4157 on March 8, 2011.

C. On January 20, 2013, the Deceased died, and the Plaintiffs, who were the deceased’s children, succeeded to the deceased. As to the instant real estate, the registration of transfer of ownership in the name of the Plaintiffs was completed on May 28, 2013 as the Daejeon District Court’s Taean District Court’s receipt No. 10212 on May 28, 2013.

On May 16, 2013, the Defendant applied for a voluntary auction of real estate amounting to KRW 80,000,000 for the instant real estate and rendered a voluntary decision to commence the auction on May 16, 2013.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 through 6 (including each number; hereinafter the same shall apply) and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The Plaintiffs’ assertion that the deceased did not have an obligation against Nonparty G, and thus, the instant collateral security does not exist, and thus, should be cancelled.

In electively, the Deceased transferred the GS convenience store located in Seosan City I (hereinafter “instant convenience store”) to the Defendant at KRW 60,000,000, and received KRW 60,000,000 upon the termination of the said transfer contract, and the said transfer contract was terminated, but the above obligation to return the said transfer price was incurred, but the Defendant returned the above obligation to the Defendant, which eventually exceeded KRW 62,550,000,000, and thus the obligation was extinguished.

Therefore, the Defendant would cancel the registration of the establishment of the instant mortgage on April 6, 201 to the Plaintiffs on the ground of the extinguishment of the secured obligation.