All appeals are dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the defendant.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

At a certain point, in determining whether there was a legal act corresponding to a fraudulent act at a certain point, it should be determined with careful consideration of the significant impact on the interests between the parties, and when there was a legal act corresponding to a fraudulent act, it should be determined on the basis of the date on which such fraudulent act was actually committed. However, barring any special circumstances, it would be inevitable to determine whether such fraudulent act was actually committed, focusing on the date on which the cause of registration appears based on a disposal document, unless there are other special circumstances.

Examining the record in light of relevant legal principles (see Supreme Court Decision 2002Da41589, Nov. 8, 2002), the lower court was justifiable to have concluded the instant mortgage contract on March 15, 2013, which is the date of registration on the registry of the establishment of a mortgage of the instant case, on the grounds stated in its reasoning. In so doing, contrary to what is alleged in the grounds of appeal, the lower court did not err by failing to err by misapprehending

In addition, the court below did not err by neglecting the exercise of the right to know in its fact-finding as above.

Therefore, all appeals are dismissed, and the costs of appeal are assessed against the losing party. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.