1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On October 15, 2004, the Plaintiff acquired a total of 4,415 square meters of land (hereinafter “instant land”) and two buildings on the ground, including B 653 square meters of land, C 1,323 square meters of land for a factory, D 989 square meters of land for a factory, E 162 square meters of land for a factory, F 48 square meters of land, and G 808 square meters of land for a factory.

B. On August 28, 2004, the Plaintiff obtained a new construction permit for the medical facilities of the first and fourth floor above the ground (hereinafter “instant building”) on the instant land. On October 2004, the Plaintiff concluded a contract for the new construction work of the instant building with a gardening integrated construction company (hereinafter “garden comprehensive construction”) and the contract amount of KRW 5.1 billion, but the construction was suspended due to disputes arising in relation to the payment of the advance payment of the advance payment of the instant building around February 2005.

C. As to the instant land on March 4, 2005, the total gardening construction completed the establishment registration of a neighboring mortgage with the debtor as the plaintiff and the maximum debt amount of KRW 990,000,000. On April 24, 2006, the plaintiff borrowed KRW 2.5 billion as the collateral from the Mapo Mutual Savings Bank on April 24, 2006, and then made a registration of the establishment of a neighboring mortgage with the debtor as the plaintiff and the maximum debt amount of KRW 3.75,00,000 to the Mapo Mutual Savings Bank. The total gardening construction revoked the registration of the establishment of a neighboring mortgage on April 27, 2006.

Then, the Plaintiff terminated the construction contract of the building of this case which was concluded with the comprehensive gardening construction, and entered into a new construction contract of this case with 5 billion won of the contract amount of 1,200,000,000 won with a mutually advantageous banking corporation (hereinafter referred to as the “beneficial banking”) on April 17, 2006. On May 29, 2006, the Plaintiff changed the owner’s name into a mutually advantageous banking building, and made a registration of the right to claim transfer of ownership as to the land of this case to secure the construction cost to the mutually beneficial banking building.

On February 9, 2007, the Hyup case completed the registration of preservation of ownership on the building of this case after completing the building of this case.

E. Meanwhile, this case.