1. All of the plaintiffs' claims are dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiffs.

1. Basic facts

A. On November 19, 2014, Plaintiff A entered into a pre-sale agreement with C on the real estate listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant real estate”) with C, with respect to the sale price of KRW 240 million, with respect to the real estate listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant real estate”).

(B) The plaintiffs later completed the registration of ownership transfer based on sale on April 1, 2015, No. 39367, which was received on April 2, 2015, for the instant real estate.

On the other hand, C completed the registration of ownership preservation as of March 13, 2015, which was received on March 13, 2015, for the instant real estate by the Jeonju District Court No. 30432, and completed the registration of the establishment of a mortgage on March 13, 2015, which was based on the contract to establish a new district court No. 30433, Mar. 13, 2015.

[Grounds for recognition] Gap 1 and 5 evidence, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Assertion and determination

A. The Defendant asserted that the Plaintiffs were aware of the fact that the sales contract for the instant real estate was concluded, and actively participated in the act of breach of trust of D, which is the operator of C, thereby concluding a mortgage contract on the instant real estate.

Such a contract to establish a collateral security is null and void because it constitutes an anti-social legal act, and the defendant is obligated to cancel the registration of establishment of a collateral security that was completed with respect to the real estate

B. The evidence submitted by the Plaintiffs alone is insufficient to recognize that the Defendant actively participated in the act of conspiracy with D or breach of trust with D and concluded a mortgage contract on the instant real estate, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it.

The above assertion by the plaintiffs is without merit.

3. Conclusion, the claim of this case is dismissed as it is without merit.