1. As to each share of 7/9 out of each real estate listed in the separate sheet to the Plaintiff:

A. Defendant B.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is the wife of D, and E, F, and G are the children of D.

B. D owned each real estate listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant real estate”) from July 7, 1998.

C. As to the instant real estate on April 25, 2012, the Seoul Northern District Court’s receipt of the Dongdaemun-gu District Court’s registration office was 13427: (a) the registration of creation of a neighboring mortgage (hereinafter “the instant establishment of a neighboring mortgage”); (b) the debtor G and the Defendant B; and (c) on May 11, 2012, the registration of establishment of a neighboring mortgage (hereinafter “the instant establishment of a first neighboring mortgage”); and (d) the registration of establishment of a collateral security (hereinafter “the instant establishment of a collateral security”) (the maximum amount of claims amount of KRW 250,000,000, the debtor G and the Defendant C”) was completed, respectively, under Article 15421 of the receipt of the said registration office.

D From December 26, 2011 to May 25, 2012, from June 21, 2012 to October 5, 2012, 201, the Plaintiff hospitalized in the I Hospital located in Dongdaemun-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, Dongdaemun-gu, due to cerebral typhism, telegraphic characteristics, and liveric typhism, and died on October 19, 2012, and the Plaintiff inherited 3/9 shares of D’s property, E, F, and 2/9 shares of D’s property.

E. On February 14, 2013, the Plaintiff completed the registration of ownership transfer on the instant real estate based on inheritance due to a consultation and division as of October 19, 2012.

【Ground of recognition】 The fact that there has been no dispute, entries in Gap's 1, 2, 3, and 4 (including each number), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Summary of the parties’ assertion

A. The registration of the establishment of a neighboring mortgage of the Plaintiff’s assertion Nos. 1 and 2 is the registration of the invalidity completed pursuant to the instant 1 and 2-mortgage contract, which was concluded by G’s act of unauthorized representation without the consent of D.

Therefore, the Plaintiff who succeeded to the instant real estate through the consultation division, and the Defendant B, the first day of this case.