1. The defendant shall accept on April 8, 2008, the registration office of the Seoul Western District Court with respect to real estate stated in the attached list to the plaintiff.

1. Basic facts

A. On April 8, 2008, Nonparty C, while engaging in the clothing wholesale business with the trade name of “D”, provided the Defendant with the goods, such as the original unit, etc., and completed the registration of the establishment of the right to collateral security (hereinafter “instant right to collateral security”) with respect to the real estate indicated in the attached list (hereinafter “instant real estate”) on April 8, 2008 by the Seoul Western District Court’s receipt of registration No. 23819, the maximum debt amount of KRW 150 million, the mortgagee, the Defendant of the right to collateral security, and the obligor E (hereinafter “instant right to collateral security”).

B. The supply transaction between F and the Defendant was terminated at the end of October 2008, and the Plaintiff acquired the instant real estate through the sale and completed the registration of ownership transfer on June 22, 2015.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 4, purport of the whole pleadings

2. Assertion and determination

A. The plaintiff asserts that the claim for the price of goods, which is the secured claim of the right to collateral security of this case, has expired due to the expiration of the extinctive prescription. Thus, the above claim for the price of goods falls under the price of goods sold by merchants, and thus, the short-term extinctive prescription of Article 163 subparagraph 6-3 of the Civil Act shall be applied. The period of extinctive prescription of this case shall begin from October 2008 at the latest when the transaction of goods supplied between F and the defendant was terminated. Since the fact that three years have elapsed from the date of the lawsuit of this case is apparent in fact, the secured claim of the right to collateral security of this case has expired

B. As to this, the Defendant asserted that the instant right to collateral security was established in order to secure the claim for the price of the goods, and thus, the extinctive prescription is interrupted. However, as F renounced the extinctive prescription benefits on February 15, 2019, it cannot be deemed that the said claim for the price of the goods was extinguished.

However, the extinctive prescription of the secured claim can not be deemed to be suspended solely on the ground that the right to collateral security is established and registered, and the evidence No. 1 of B.