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

A. On December 14, 200, the Defendant agreed to set up a maximum debt amount of KRW 40 million with respect to each of the real estate listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant land”) between C on December 14, 200, and completed the registration of establishment of each of the neighboring mortgages stated in the purport of the claim (hereinafter “registration of creation of a neighboring mortgage”).

However, the registration of the establishment of a new mortgage of this case was completed by a false conspiracy without any secured debt, and even if there was a secured debt, it had already been extinguished by the prescription. The plaintiff is a provisional registration holder who had concluded a pre-sale contract for the land of this case and sought the cancellation of the registration of the establishment of a new mortgage of this case by subrogation of

B. The purport of the Defendant’s assertion was that the establishment registration of the mortgage of this case was established as the secured claim in the event that the agreement between C and the Defendant to receive one-half of the shares out of the land of this case was not fulfilled, and C filed a lawsuit against the Defendant on April 11, 2008 against Busan District Court 2008Gadan5153, seeking the cancellation of the establishment registration of the mortgage of this case. Since the Defendant asserted the above secured claim and was rendered a favorable judgment on October 23, 2008, the statute of limitations was interrupted around that time.

2. Determination

A. According to each of the statements in Gap evidence Nos. 7 through 9, it is acknowledged that C asserted that the establishment registration of the establishment of the creation of the creation of the creation of the creation of the neighboring mortgage of this case against the plaintiff et al. was made by a false conspiracy, but in the Busan District Court case No. 2012Da64761 and the Busan District Court No. 2013Na184766, which was the appellate court, it is difficult to conclude that the establishment registration of the establishment of the neighboring mortgage of this case was made by a false conspiracy solely on the basis of the above facts, in light of the fact that C's assertion was not accepted in the above case.