1. All appeals by the Defendants are dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal are assessed against the Defendants.

3. The judgment of the court of first instance is ordered.

1. The reasons why this court should explain the above part of the facts of recognition are the same as the entry of "1. Basic Facts" among the reasons of the judgment of the court of first instance. Thus, they are cited by the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. Determination as to the expiration of the extinctive prescription of the check money obligation of this case

A. As to whether the extinctive prescription has expired from July 30, 2003, the Plaintiff first asserted that the extinctive prescription of the instant check payment obligation has expired after the lapse of 10 years from July 30, 2003, the following day after the payment order for the instant check payment became final and conclusive, and the fact that 10 years have elapsed from July 30, 2003 is apparent.

In regard to this, the defendants defense that the time limitation of the above claim was suspended by the plaintiff's establishment and transfer of the right to collateral of this case to secure the repayment of the check of this case. Thus, in order for the plaintiff to secure the repayment of the check of this case, the plaintiff shall conclude the right to collateral of this case with respect to the real estate of this case which was owned by J as of the time when the plaintiff secured the repayment of the check of this case, and on November 13, 2003, the fact that the registration of establishment of collateral of this case was completed on the net property of this case was completed on November 13, 200 as of the above facts acknowledged. Accordingly, the plaintiff's extinctive prescription of the check of this case was suspended after the lapse of 10 years counting from July 30, 203.

B. Whether the extinctive prescription has expired from November 13, 2003, and on the other hand, even if the registration of establishment of the right to collateral security was completed again from November 13, 2003, the Plaintiff asserted that the extinctive prescription of the check payment of this case has expired even if the registration of establishment of the right to collateral security was completed again from November 13, 2003. Thus, the fact that the registration of establishment of the right to collateral security was completed on November 13, 2003 and ten years have elapsed from November 13, 2003 is apparent.