1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On November 27, 2004, the Defendant’s wife C and the Plaintiff entered into an exchange contract (hereinafter “instant exchange contract”). The column for the exchange contract includes only D bath land and building owned by Chungcheongbuk-gun and the land owned by the Plaintiff, and the land owned by the Plaintiff, and the column for special agreement states that “the Plaintiff will succeed to all shares of the Party F and G (hereinafter “the instant land”) in the area for special agreement.”

B. On December 3, 2004, the Plaintiff completed the registration of ownership transfer with respect to the above land E, and on December 21, 2004, on the Defendant, the husband of C, the Defendant, who was the husband of C, completed the registration of creation of a collateral security (hereinafter “instant collateral security”) with respect to the Plaintiff’s share among each land of this case, with the maximum debt amount of KRW 60,000,000,000 for the Plaintiff’s obligor and the maximum debt amount of KRW 60,000.

C. At the time of entering into the instant exchange contract, each of the instant land was designated as a land transaction permission zone under the Act on the Utilization and Management of the National Territory, but its designation was cancelled on January 30, 2009.

[Ground of recognition] Facts that Gap evidence Nos. 1-2, Eul evidence Nos. 1-2, Eul evidence Nos. 1 and 2, the purport of the whole pleadings, and no dispute exists

2. Judgment on the parties' arguments

A. The summary of the Plaintiff’s assertion 1) The Plaintiff agreed to pay KRW 30,000,000 to the Defendant’s wife C as the difference in the exchange value at the time of the instant exchange agreement, and set up and ordered the instant collateral security agreement to the Defendant. Since the Plaintiff did not have any obligation directly borne by the Defendant, the establishment registration of the instant collateral security should be cancelled by its invalidation. 2) Even if not, the collateral security obligation of the instant case has expired 10 years from December 21, 2004, and thus, the establishment registration of the instant collateral security should be cancelled.

B. 1) First of all, we examine the secured obligation of the instant right to collateral security. A) The facts of the recognition and the evidence, and the pleading.