1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. With respect to cases where this Court applies for the suspension of compulsory execution 2017 Chicago10230, the Court shall decide on October 2017.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Plaintiff’s mother, the Plaintiff’s mother, managed the Plaintiff’s property on behalf of the Plaintiff.

B. Around April 2016, E heard the phrase that he/she would have a loan from an unqualified person, and issued the Plaintiff’s certificate of seal imprint, seal imprint, and passbook.

The above certificate of seal imprint is issued on April 14, 2016 by the plaintiff himself/herself.

C. On April 18, 2016, the person who was unaware of name delivered the above documents to the Defendant, borrowed KRW 10 million, and concluded a mortgage contract. The Defendant issued a loan certificate, a mortgage contract document, and a certificate of seal impression as above to a certified judicial scrivener F and entrusted the registration of the establishment of a collateral security. The registration of the establishment of the collateral security (hereinafter “instant collateral security”) was completed on April 18, 2016 by the Seoul Southern District Court’s registration No. 25105 on the third floor D of Geumcheon-gu, Seoul District Court (hereinafter “Seoul Southern District Court”).

On April 18, 2016, the Defendant confirmed that the establishment registration of the creation of the root of this case was completed, and deposited KRW 5 million among the above loans in the name of the Plaintiff, and KRW 5 million on April 19, 2016, respectively.

E. As the Plaintiff did not repay the above loan, the Defendant applied for a voluntary auction based on the instant collateral security and commenced the voluntary auction to the Seoul Southern District Court G on January 12, 2017.

F. On March 28, 2018, the Plaintiff repaid each of the Defendant KRW 2 million, and KRW 6 million on April 13, 2018.

[Ground of Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap 2, 4 through 11, Eul 1 through 4, 6, witness F's testimony, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The plaintiff issued documents related to loans belonging to the Bosing Fraud. The plaintiff asserted that the establishment registration of the mortgage of this case was not based on the plaintiff's intention and thus should be cancelled due to the invalidity of the cause.

As seen earlier, E, the Plaintiff’s agent, issued a certificate of seal imprint, etc. to obtain a loan, shall be borrowed as money and the creation of a security interest accordingly.