1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Basic Facts

Attached Form

The real estate indicated in the list (hereinafter “each of the instant real estate”) was owned by C, and was distributed on June 10, 2016 upon commencement of the auction procedure for real estate rent B in the Jeonju District Court Branch B.

The Plaintiff reported to C that there was a claim of KRW 765,896,394, and received KRW 90,941,854 as dividends. The Defendant received KRW 91,657,833 in the dividend procedure, among the collateral security holders of the establishment registration of neighboring mortgage, which was completed on April 9, 2013, pursuant to the former District Court’s military support registration and the registration of establishment of neighboring mortgage, which was completed on April 9, 2013.

Before the aforementioned distribution procedure is carried out, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the Defendant for the establishment of the right to collateral security against the Defendant on the ground that the Defendant obtained the establishment of the right to collateral security against each of the instant real estate from C as above was a fraudulent act. ① Revocation of the right to collateral security agreement concluded between the Defendant and C on each of the instant real estate, and ② Claim for the cancellation of each of the instant real estate in the name of the Defendant against the Defendant C as the Gunsan Branch of the Jeonju District Court 2013

On May 29, 2015, the above court rendered a ruling of recommending reconciliation against the Plaintiff and the Defendant that “The Defendant shall implement C the registration of Gunsan Branch of the Jeonju District Court on each of the instant real estate and the registration of cancellation of the registration of the establishment of a mortgage near the area that was completed on April 9, 2013 by the receipt of No. 17152 on April 9, 2013 (hereinafter referred to as “decision of recommending reconciliation of this case”), and the decision of recommending reconciliation of this case was finalized as it is, depending on the absence of objection by the Plaintiff and the Defendant.

However, while the Plaintiff did not cancel the registration of creation of a neighboring real estate in the name of the Defendant in accordance with the decision of recommending reconciliation of this case, the distribution procedure was carried out as above with respect to each of the instant real estate, and the Defendant is the mortgagee of each of the instant real estate in the distribution procedure.