1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff, on June 9, 2008, lent KRW 100,000,000 to C Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Nonindicted Company”) at the rate of 3% per month.

The defendant was the representative director of the non-party company from August 21, 2006 to December 18, 2008.

B. On June 10, 2008, in order to secure the repayment of the above loan claims, the non-party company completed the registration of creation of mortgage (hereinafter referred to as the “registration of creation of mortgage”) with respect to the second 601 of the building E and the second 601 of the building E in Seoul Special Metropolitan City, Gwanak-gu, and one parcel, which is owned D on June 10, 2008, with the debtor D, G, and mortgagee as the plaintiff.

C. The registration of the establishment of a neighboring to the first place of the instant case was cancelled on August 25, 2008 due to the termination.

With respect to the second 601 of the F building, the maximum debt amount of 195,00,000 won was completed on August 25, 2008, the debtor, D and G, and the debtor as the party having the right to collateral security, and on August 28, 2008, the amount of claims was 130,000,000,000 won as the object of the right to collateral security, and the debtor, the non-party company, the creditor, and the creditor of the non-party company as the FF Mutual Savings Bank, with the right to collateral security (hereinafter “instant supplementary registration”).

E. On November 28, 2008, with respect to the registration of the establishment of a mortgage (hereinafter “the establishment of a mortgage of this case No. 2”) against the non-party company No. H 101, the maximum debt amount of November 28, 2008, which was owned by the non-party company, was completed, with the debtor I and the mortgagee as the plaintiff.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 9, purport of the whole pleadings

2. The Plaintiff’s registration of cancellation of the registration of the establishment of a neighboring to the first place of the instant case, and the registration of the establishment of a neighboring to the second place of the instant case was completed without the Plaintiff’s consent, and the Plaintiff was unaware of the fact that the supplementary registration

The registration of the establishment of the first place of the instant case was established to secure the Plaintiff’s loan claims, and the Defendant did not obtain the Plaintiff’s consent by intention or gross negligence.