1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the plaintiff in the judgment of the court of first instance (the first head and sub-paragraph 1(b)) shall be modified as follows:

1. Basic facts

A. On December 31, 2007, the Daegu District Court received a permanent resident registration office of the Daegu District Court on December 31, 2007, as the grounds for the establishment of the right to collateral security (hereinafter “the right to collateral security”) with respect to Lan Forest land No. 45,315 square meters (hereinafter “the land No. 1”) as a permanent resident owned by A, and registered the establishment of the right to collateral security (hereinafter “the right to collateral security”) with regard to the right to collateral security (hereinafter “the right to collateral security”) as the Defendant on December 31, 2007.

B. On December 31, 2007, as to the land No. 2, M forest and 86,081 square meters (hereinafter “the land No. 3”) owned by the Plaintiff, the registration for the creation of a joint collateral mortgage (hereinafter “the instant joint collateral mortgage”) with the Plaintiff, the debtor, and the mortgagee, as the Defendant, was completed on December 28, 2007, with regard to the land No. 2 and 86,081 square meters (hereinafter “the instant land”). On March 9, 2010, on December 31, 2007, the registration for the transfer of ownership was completed in the YTTT as to the land No. 2 and 3.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 3-1, 2, 3, Eul evidence 18-1, 2, and 3, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Scope of trial in the party deliberation after the lawsuit is pending and remanded;

A. The judgment of the first instance court and the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the Defendant claiming for the cancellation of the registration of creation of a mortgage of each of the instant sub-mortgages by asserting that A borrowed KRW 200 million from the Defendant, and that A, upon the commencement of a voluntary auction procedure based on the first sub-mortgages, deposited the principal and interest of the instant loan in repayment of KRW 206,136,986, and that A had all of the secured debt of each of the instant sub-mortgages of this case.

The court of first instance recognized that the secured obligation of each of the instant mortgages was extinguished due to the above repayment deposit, and sentenced that the Defendant would cancel the registration of establishment of each of the instant mortgages after receiving payment of KRW 5,271,200 for auction expenses.