A. Defendant A shall have the salary registry office of the Daegu District Court on March 22, 2004.

A. On May 15, 2006, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit for reimbursement claim by the Incheon District Court 2006Gau146485 with C as the Defendant, and received a decision of performance recommendation in favor of the Plaintiff on May 15, 2006, and the said decision became final and conclusive on June 8, 2006.

B. Defendant A completed the provisional registration of the right to claim transfer of ownership (hereinafter “the provisional registration of this case”) with the Daegu District Court No. 1874, Mar. 22, 2004, on the grounds of the pre-sale agreement as of March 17, 2004 with respect to each real estate listed in the separate sheet owned by C (hereinafter “each real estate of this case”).

C. As to each of the instant real estate owned by Defendant B, the Daegu District Court No. 1873, receipt on March 22, 2004, and the contract establishing a mortgage as of March 17, 2004, Defendant B completed the registration of creation of a mortgage over the amount of KRW 105,00,000 (hereinafter “the registration of creation of a mortgage over the instant case”).

[Reasons for Recognition] Each entry of Gap 1 through 5 (including paper numbers), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. False indication of agreement;

A. (1) The parties’ assertion (1) trade reservation between the plaintiff C and the defendant A, and the establishment of collateral security obligation between the plaintiff C and the defendant B is both null and void by means of false conspiracy, and the provisional registration of this case based on invalid legal act and the establishment registration of the establishment of the mortgage of this case

The plaintiff seeks to cancel the provisional registration of this case and the registration of the establishment of the mortgage of this case on behalf of insolvent C.

(2) The Defendants E lent money to C through the Defendants, and as a result, the provisional registration of this case and the establishment registration of the establishment of the mortgage of this case was completed to secure this, it is not a false declaration of conspiracy.

B. According to each of the evidence Nos. 1 to 12, the defendants can be found to have engaged in monetary transactions with C and C, as the children of C and C.

In light of these facts, it is difficult to see that the act of establishing the collateral security obligation between the Defendants and C is invalid as a prior agreement.