1. The lawsuit concerning the claim for the confirmation of existence of an obligation among the lawsuits in this case shall be dismissed.

2. The defendant shall complete the plaintiff with Jeonnam-do.

1. As to the legitimacy of the part of the claim for the confirmation of existence of a debt, the Plaintiff sought to confirm that there is no secured debt as stated in the Disposition No. 2 of this case, and sought to cancel the said right of collateral security.

A lawsuit for confirmation is permissible when the Plaintiff’s right or legal status is infeasible and dangerous, and obtaining a judgment of confirmation is the most effective and appropriate means to resolve the dispute. In addition, in a case where the person who created the right to collateral security seeks to confirm that there was no obligation of collateral based on the right to collateral security, and seeks to cancel the registration of creation of the right to collateral security, seeking cancellation of the right to collateral security on the ground that there is no obligation of collateral security, is a direct means to resolve the dispute effectively and appropriately. Therefore, it cannot be said that there is a benefit of confirmation to seek confirmation that there is no obligation of collateral

(1) The part concerning the claim for the confirmation of existence of an obligation in the instant lawsuit is unlawful as there is no benefit of confirmation, as it does not exist any benefit of confirmation.

2. Determination on claims for the cancellation of the registration of the establishment of a neighboring mortgage

A. Facts of recognition 1) The Plaintiff borrowed 4 million won from the Defendant and secured the establishment registration of a neighboring mortgage as stated in paragraph (2) of this Article (hereinafter “mortgage of this case”) to the Defendant.

(2) On July 23, 1996, the Plaintiff repaid to the Defendant KRW 3 million.

3) On December 2, 199, the Defendant filed a lawsuit against the Plaintiff seeking payment of the remainder of the loan amount of KRW 1 million with the 99 Ghana Branch Court of Gwangju District Court Decision 9Da579 (hereinafter “instant winning judgment”). The Defendant rendered a favorable judgment on December 2, 199 (hereinafter “instant winning judgment”).

The judgment of winning the case was rendered on December 29, 199, and the judgment of winning the case became final and conclusive on December 29, 199 (the fact that there is no dispute over the grounds for recognition, the entries in Gap evidence 1, 2, and 3, and the purport of the whole pleadings.