The defendant shall have jurisdiction over the plaintiff's each real estate stated in the attached list in the Suwon District Court's Ansan Branch Office on 199.

Facts of recognition

The network C completed the registration of the transfer of ownership as to the real estate stated in the separate sheet No. 2, which was received on December 7, 197 from the Suwon District Court, No. 48204 on December 7, 197, and the registration of the transfer of ownership as to the real estate listed in the separate sheet No. 1 (hereinafter collectively referred to as the "real estate of this case") in the Suwon District Court, Anyang Branch Branch of the Family Court, Anyang Branch of the Family Court, No. 4646, Jan.

The deceased C completed the registration of the establishment of a mortgage on the instant real property to the Defendant, as the No. 59402, which was received on July 2, 1999, with respect to the Suwon District Court, for the establishment of a mortgage on the said real property, with the maximum debt amount of KRW 100,000,000,000,000,000,000,00

(hereinafter referred to as the “instant joint collateral security”) upon the death of the deceased C, the registration of ownership transfer was completed by the children D, E, F, G, and H with respect to each one-fifth share of the instant real estate due to inheritance. After the death of H, the Plaintiff and I, who is a child, completed the registration of ownership transfer with respect to each 1/10 share of the instant real estate by inheritance.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1-1 and 2 as well as the purport of the whole argument by the plaintiff of the parties concerned, the right to collateral security of this case does not exist, and even if the secured claim exists in preliminary, the right to collateral security of this case has expired by ten years after the expiration of the ten-year statute of limitations. Thus, the right to collateral security of this case should be cancelled

The Plaintiff, a co-owner of the instant real estate, cannot request the Defendant to cancel the registration of the entire establishment of the instant mortgage in excess of his/her share.

Judgment

Whether the mortgage of this case is null and void because there is no secured claim, the mortgage is established with only the maximum amount of the debt to be secured, and reserving the determination of the debt in the future (Article 357(1) of the Civil Act).