1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

1...

1. The grounds cited in the judgment of the court of first instance do not differ significantly from the allegations in the court of first instance, and even if the entries in the evidence submitted in the court of first instance in the evidence No. 16 through No. 20 (including the serial number; hereinafter the same shall apply), each of the evidence No. 16 through No. 16 (including the serial number; hereinafter the same shall apply) submitted in the court of first instance (the evidence No. 17 through No. 19 was submitted in connection with the Guang City M., and the conclusion date of the construction contract between the O (P company) and his/her Stonton PP corporation was written as of September 15, 2012 after the provisional registration stated in the purport of the claim was completed on September 25, 2012, and it is difficult to believe the Defendant’s assertion that the construction was already suspended for a period of one year after September 2012, 2012.

In relation to the foregoing, it is insufficient to recognize that the specification of construction materials, etc. among them was for the instant remodeling project or determined the construction cost as KRW 500 million. Rather, as the Defendant’s own recognition, the Defendant’s assertion that the repair of defects was performed at the request of I after completing the instant remodeling project, and the repair of defects was performed without receiving a large amount of construction cost of KRW 250,000,000,000. Ultimately, it is difficult for the Defendant to believe that the Defendant received full payment of the construction cost from I or completed settlement of the construction cost after completion of the instant remodeling project. Ultimately, as alleged by the Plaintiff, the first instance judgment deeming that the secured obligation of each provisional registration stated in the purport of the claim was extinguished is justifiable.

Therefore, this court's reasoning is identical to the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, thereby citing it in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. In conclusion, the judgment of the court of first instance is legitimate, and the defendant's appeal is justified.