1. The Defendant shall pay the Plaintiff a full amount of KRW 18,391,927 within the scope of KRW 30,000,000 and the said amount from June 17, 201.

1. Basic facts

A. The defendant from 200 to 300 lent money by the day between C and C. D is a person who has been in the same business relationship with C, and the plaintiff is a person who was in the same business relationship with D.

B. On November 30, 2007, C prepared a certificate of borrowing the borrowed amount of KRW 50,000,000, and paid interest equivalent to 3% per month to the Plaintiff.

C. On October 20, 2010, the Defendant prepared a certificate of the loan amount of KRW 30,000,000 with the Plaintiff, setting the loan amount of KRW 30,000 on October 30, 201, interest rate of KRW 300,000, and on October 22, 201, the Defendant set up a collateral security (hereinafter “instant collateral security”) with respect to the instant real estate owned by the Plaintiff at KRW 30,00,000 with respect to the maximum debt amount.

Around December 30, 2010, C has drawn up a loan certificate stating that the loan amount of KRW 130,000,000 is due, December 30, 2012, interest rate of KRW 2%, and D has set up and issued the above loan certificate and each written waiver of the right to sell.

E. On February 17, 2012, immediately after D filed an application for individual rehabilitation with the Chuncheon District Court for the instant real estate, the procedure of voluntary auction was initiated by the Defendant, a mortgagee, to E in this Court.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 3 through 7, Eul evidence Nos. 1 through 4, 6, 9 through 11 (including each number), and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. We examine whether the secured claim of the instant right to collateral security has ceased to exist due to repayment.

A. On March 30, 2011, the Plaintiff asserts that C, the person performing the obligation, transferred KRW 30,000,000 to the Defendant on March 30, 201, the designation of the instant secured claim as of March 30, 201, or that there was an appropriation or agreement to extinguish the instant secured claim first.

If the parties assert that the legal effect granted by appropriation of performance is more favorable to themselves under the provisions of the Civil Act, and that there is an agreement to designate or agree on appropriation of performance.