1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

1. The following facts may be found either in dispute between the parties or in full view of the entries in Gap evidence 1 to 14, Eul evidence 2 and the whole purport of pleadings:

The area of 243 square meters in Gangnam-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government is an aggregate building site including E (hereinafter referred to as “instant E”) on its ground.

B. On March 7, 2007, the Defendant asserted that the claim against N,O, etc. was transferred by M as of March 7, 2007 by this Court No. 2007Kahap235, and received the decision of provisional seizure of the instant subparagraph E, and on March 12, 2007, the registration of preservation of ownership in the name of N, the owner of the instant title, was completed due to the entrustment of the registration of provisional seizure entry.

C. On December 28, 2009, the registration of the right to collateral security (hereinafter “registration of the right to collateral security”) was completed with respect to F’s share out of the size of 243 square meters in Gangnam-gu Seoul, Gangnam-gu, Seoul, with the maximum debt amount of KRW 300,000,000, and the debtor F.

Since then, the mortgagee of the right to collateral security registered prior to the registration was changed from P to Q on December 29, 2010 due to the transfer of confirmed claims to Q, from Q on August 17, 2012 to Q I on August 13, 201, and the debtor of the prior registration of the right to collateral security changed from F to F on January 13, 201.

E. On the other hand, the defendant on September 24, 2008 as to the subparagraph E of this case by the court R of this case.

On June 15, 2010, the plaintiff received a decision to commence a compulsory auction based on the decision of provisional seizure stated in the Paragraph, and the plaintiff filed a lawsuit with the defendant,O, etc. on June 15, 2010 by a third party under Seoul Central District Court 2010Kahap60818. In the above lawsuit, the plaintiff asserted that "the title E is not the owner N, but the building owned by the original purchaser, and the plaintiff purchased the title E fromO."

F. Accordingly, the Defendant appealed as Seoul High Court 201Na1223, and at the above appellate trial, the following mediation was established on January 6, 2012 (hereinafter “special mediation”).

1...